sign in sign up
<<
Home , Cuomo family, Dennis Vacco, Eliot Spitzer, Fred Hochberg, Giuliani Partners, Governor of New York

The Race fo Race The R Gove R no R & & aTT o R ney Gene ney R al: al: c ampai G n Round n T able 2006 • • 2006 able

The Race foR A joint program of Milano and the Center for City Affairs at . & aTToRney GeneRal 72 FiFTh AveNue campaign Roundtable 2006 New York, NY 10011 www.MilANo.NewSChool.edu Wednesday, november 29, 2006 The Race for Governor and Attorney General: Campaign Roundtable 2006 was made possible thanks to the generous support of Bernard L. Schwartz and the Dyson Foundation

Milano also wishes to thanks the following for their help in planning and coordinating this event: Mark Halperin of ABC News; Mia Lipsit and Andrew White of the Center for Affairs; Louis Dorff, Tracy Jackson, and Vandana Nagaraj of Milano; Daniel Morris and Caroline Oyama of The New School; and Gigi Georges, Molly Watkins, and Howard Wolfson of the Glover Park Group.

This publication is available on the Web at: www.newschool.edu/milano/docs/The_Race_for_Governor.pdf

For further information or to obtain copies of this report, please contact: Center for New York City Affairs Milano The New School for Management and Urban Policy 72 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10011

212.229.5418, fax 212.229.5335 [email protected] www.newschool.edu/milano/nycaffairs www.milano.newschool.edu

Edited Transcript Edited by Sarah Tobias

Photographs: Don Pollard

ifc The Race for Governor and Attorney General: Campaign Roundtable 2006 Wednesday, November 29, 2006 The Race for Governor and Attorney General: Campaign Roundtable 2006 Table of Contents

Dean’s Forward ...... v Roundtable Program ...... vii

Edited Transcript • Session I: The Race for Attorney General Who’s Who ...... 1 Campaign Timeline ...... 2 The Democratic Primary: Could the Result Have Been Different? ...... 3 Framing the Frontrunner: Cuomo, HUD, and Tobacco ...... 5 Engaging the Frontrunner: Politics Without Personal Attacks ...... 9 Building a Campaign: Lessons from the Past ...... 12 Republican Expectations: Limited Party Support ...... 14 Chauffeur-Gate: The Hevesi Issue ...... 15 Republican Strategy ...... 16 Aiding, Abetting, or Absent: and Al Pirro ...... 17 The Ascent of the New York State Democratic Party ...... 20 The O’Donnell Factor ...... 21 Press Strategy ...... 22 Engaging Ethnic and Specialty Media ...... 23 Using Gubernatorial Clout ...... 24 Pirro and the Chewing Gum Incident ...... 24 Green, Maloney, Pirro: The Political Future ...... 24

Edited Transcript • Session II: The Race for Governor Who’s Who ...... 26 The Republican Primary: Could the Result Have Been Different? ...... 26 Campaign Timeline ...... 27 The Future of the Republican Party in New York State ...... 27 Weld’s Campaign: Running as Incumbent ...... 29 The Democratic Primary ...... 35 Explaining Suozzi’s Candidacy ...... 37 Derailing Spitzer: A Possibility? ...... 39 The General Election ...... 43 More Chauffeur-Gate: Faso for Comptroller? ...... 45 Lights, Camera, Action: Faso Freezes ...... 46 The Same-Sex Marriage Question ...... 48 and the Nomination Fight ...... 48 Spitzer and the Press ...... 49 Chauffeur-Gate: The Finale ...... 49 Advertising Strategy ...... 51 Strengthening the Democratic Party ...... 51 Lightning Round Questions ...... 52 Schumer vs. Clinton ...... 52

Participant Biographies ...... 54 FOREWORD Shortly after the 2006 election, Milano The New School for Management and Urban Policy invited senior strategists from the campaigns for New York attorney general and governor and the journalists who covered them to discuss the races. The forum followed a similar discussion convened by Milano after the 2005 New York City mayoral campaign. The focus was on how campaign decisions reacted to events, how decisions were made, and why. In addition, our intention was to leave a historical record of elections in our city and state enabling us to turn back to them in the future, compare strategies over the years, and learn from the differences and similarities.

The race for governor was vastly different from the mayor’s race. While Mayor Bloomberg, like , ultimately won his election with a substantial majority of the vote, he did not start out with a substantial lead in the polls. The 2005 election year also featured a competitive, and at times, nasty Democratic primary. Not so in 2006. Eliot Spitzer was a juggernaut from the moment he quietly announced he was running for governor a full two years before the election. He had established a national reputation as attorney general for taking on and many observers thought that his “Mr. Clean” image was just what the state capital—notorious for secrecy and dysfunction—needed. Despite a spirited challenge in the primary by Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi, Spitzer’s path to the nomination and the Governor’s Mansion seemed largely unobstructed. He was able to run as both an agent of change and as an incumbent.

Additionally, it was noted that New York’s senior senator, Charles E. Schumer, had at one time expressed interest in running for Governor but decided early on that he would remain in the U.S. Senate. This, too, had a profound effect on the Democratic field.

After Governor Pataki’s announcement that he would not run for a fourth term, jockeying for the Republican nomination began immediately, with early attention focusing on former Governor William Weld. Originally from , Weld had returned to New York after serving nearly two terms as an extremely popular moderate Republican in the Bay State. Weld—a Harvard educated, charismatic lawyer who reporters appreciated for his wit and unguarded comments—stood in stark contrast to the serious, precise, and lawyerly bearing of Eliot Spitzer. As we learned in our discussion, Weld’s lack of understanding of how primaries work in New York led to his being outmaneuvered by the lesser-known . Faso assiduously courted the county chairs and ended up with the nomination. He has since returned to the private sector. A number of the observers in the room expressed the view that we have probably not heard the last of , since he would certainly like the

v option of running for ’s senate seat remained quiet, largely refusing to should it become vacant after the 2008 election. engage on the topic. Pirro confronted the allegations head on and demanded an investigation into the source Despite stark differences in their campaign platforms, of the information that had been leaked to the press. the contest between Spitzer and Faso didn’t generate Ultimately, she didn’t lose much ground in the polls, many sparks. The election was portrayed in the press but the distraction prevented her from closing the large from the beginning as Spitzer’s to lose, and Faso had gap that stood between her and the first-born son of a hard time breaking through that inevitability. Faso’s former Governor Mario M. Cuomo. serious and message almost exclusively focused on taxes, and left him little opportunity to highlight the What follows is a transcript of the two roundtable differences between himself and Spitzer. For example, conversations (edited lightly for comprehension). We on social issues such as same-sex marriage, Spitzer hope that you find the dialogue as informative, useful, and Faso parted ways. John Faso did not believe it an and thought-provoking as those of us around the table important issue though clearly it would have scored and in the room did. him some points. At the roundtable, there was criticism of the way the press covered this race. By continually —Dean Fred P. Hochberg referring to John Faso as trailing by 50 percentage Milano The New School for Management  points, it made it very difficult for the challenger to and Urban Policy ever gain any momentum. We hope this is one of the lessons learned from our review of the campaign.

Because of the lack of competitiveness in the governor’s race, we decided to add to our review an office that doesn’t normally attract much attention, but in 2006, it was the one to watch.

Jeanine Pirro, the former Westchester County District Attorney, was the only candidate for the Republican nomination. She switched to the attorney general’s race after some initial stumbles in her attempt to take on Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. Pirro was popular with Republicans statewide—she was moderate on social issues, telegenic and articulate, and her tough- on-crime rhetoric appealed to suburban voters. But she also had baggage in the form of a convicted felon husband. His past and present mistakes came back to haunt her again and again on the campaign trail.

The Democratic primary featured two well-known candidates—former New York City Public Advocate Mark Green and former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Andrew Cuomo. The race also featured Charlie King, a longtime Democratic Party activist who had worked under Andrew Cuomo at HUD, and a first-time candidate, —an openly gay lawyer who had also served in the Clinton administration. Cuomo led in the polls in the period leading up to the primary and general elections. But there was a sense among reporters covering the race that his fortunes could change, and that if he ended up with the party’s nomination he would face a spirited challenge from Pirro.

Pirro did indeed run an aggressive campaign but she was severely hobbled by the announcement of a federal investigation alleging that she had illegally attempted to wiretap her husband in order to uncover whether he was having an extramarital affair. Pirro’s private life served as fodder for the tabloids for days, while

vi Program 8:00–8:30 a.m.   Continental breakfast 8:30–8:40 a.m.   Welcome, Dean Fred P. Hochberg 8:40–10:15 a.m.   Roundtable I: The Race for Attorney General 10:15–10:45 a.m.   Break 10:45 a.m. to 12:45 p.m.   Roundtable II: The Race for Governor

Roundtable Participants

Moderator Mark Halperin, ABC-TV News

campaign Representatives Andrew Cuomo for Attorney General Jefrey Pollock Faso for Governor Dean D’Amore • Susan Del Percio Mark Green for Attorney General Mark Benoit Sean Maloney for Attorney General Erick Mullen • Tony Suber Jeanine Pirro for Attorney General John Gallagher • John Haggerty Spitzer-Paterson 2006 Christine Anderson • Jon Silvan • Ryan Toohey Friends of Tom Suozzi Paul Rivera • Harry Siegel Weld for New York Walter Breakell

Journalists and Commentators Wayne Barrett, Village Voice Elizabeth Benjamin, Albany Times-Union Dominic Carter, NY1 News Maggie Haberman, Patrick Healy, New York Times Ben Smith,

vii ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL

able to look back on to study what happened in 2006. I believe we really laid a good cornerstone for this last year Who’s Who and I am looking forward to adding to that with today’s proceedings. Moderator Mark Halperin, ABC News I have to tell you that when we planned this event it was very lonely. I didn’t feel bubbling enthusiasm from Campaign Representatives the staff about covering the 2006 race. It was a sense, Andrew Cuomo for Attorney General frankly, that this governor’s race was going to be a bit Jefrey Pollock, Pollster of a dud. That’s not a commentary on the candidates, who are all excellent, and in fact one of them is a board Jeanine Pirro for Attorney General member here at Milano. John Gallagher, Communications Director John Haggerty, Campaign Manager But it was a factor that Elliot Spitzer had such a huge head of steam that it did not look like there’d really be a Mark Green for Attorney General  race. So I hope that one of the things that we’ll be able Mark Benoit, Senior Staffer to learn today is how that juggernaut came to be. What Sean Maloney for New York Attorney General  was it that made Spitzer such a formidable force? And Erick Mullen, Campaign Manager and Media Consultant why did other candidates have such a hard time getting Tony Suber, General Consultant traction? And what does that say about the future in terms of having uncompetitive races? Journalists I’m also hopeful we can get some idea about the future Village Voice plans of those who were hopeful about running for Wayne Barrett governor and did not succeed. And some idea of what New York Post the Republican Party will be doing to pick up the pieces Maggie Haberman after this year’s election.

New York Daily News I did speak to John Faso just yesterday. He called me. Ben Smith We had a dinner for the panelists last night, and he regretted he couldn’t attend, and he said to me, “Well Fred, it was a really lousy year to run as a Republican in New York.” And I said that certainly was an FRED HOCHBERG: I want to welcome you to the 2006 understatement. I did suggest in retrospect he might review of the governor’s and attorney general’s races. The Kennedy School has covered presidential races for the last four, five, or six cycles, and I thought it would be important to do something similar here in New York City. We began in 2001. We actually tried to do this in 2002. But at the last minute the Pataki folks pulled out of the conference so we did not have a record of that campaign.

I’m happy that we were able to restart this program last year here at Milano and really have an opportunity for an in-depth conversation with the campaign managers, the strategists and the journalists who covered the races. We really want to have a historical record so that we can look back and compare and contrast strategies and learn from them. At your chair we have a transcript of the 2005 campaign and we’ll be publishing a companion to that piece at the end of today and hope to have that out to you early next year.

Since this is a university, I want to ask our panelists in particular to put aside their normal reservations about being forthcoming and candid. Today is a day for learning. Today is a day that future campaigns will be

Milano Dean Fred P. Hochberg opens up the day’s program.

 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL

Mark Halperin, ABC News political director, moderates the day’s discussions.

2006. In retrospect we might have also included the comptroller’s race, but we just ran out of time on that.

And I think that the attorney general’s race first attracted a field of candidates in large part due to the job that Elliot Spitzer did. The way he transformed the office of the attorney general made this a far more compelling and interesting position for people to compete for. This race for attorney general was also marked by a bit of drama. We’ll let the panelists get into that. This campaign for attorney general also marked the reemergence or resurgence of a in New York State, with Andrew Cuomo’s election as the attorney general. So I think there’s a lot to discuss and a lot to learn.

I want to do a couple of thank yous before we start. First and foremost I want to thank our moderator Mark Halperin and his associate David Chalian of ABC News. I want to thank Mia Lipsit and Andrew have had a better shot at running for comptroller and White of the Center for New York City Affairs; on that subject he was silent. Vandana Nagaraj and our three students who worked on this, Antoine Wallace, Linda Silver-Thompson and Mark Green did join us last night for dinner. There was David Howe. I also want to thank our development wild speculation that he would also be hovering today, director Louis Dorff, my assistant Tracy Jackson, as perhaps incognito, in disguise. I have not spotted well as the folks at the Glover Park Group: Howard him yet, but there’s always that possibility. Sean Wolfson, Gigi Georges, and Molly Watkins. Maloney also joined us for dinner and promptly left Lastly, I want to thank our sponsors, Bernard L. for Paris this morning. So I am hoping we get a better Schwartz and Robert Dyson, for their kind, bold, and understanding of the governor’s race and its aftermath. generous support of this. And I want to remind you that as a companion to this we’ll be hosting a panel The other thing we did this year that is different was here on December 12 entitled Governing Change: to expand the format to include the attorney general’s Politics, Policy and the Spitzer Administration. So I race. Normally the down ticket races don’t attract hope you will join us for that as well. much attention. But I think the reporters and those of us who watched the campaign will tell you that So with that, let me turn this over to Mark and we’ll the attorney general’s race was the one to watch in have a good day.

Campaign Timelines: Attorney general How the races were portrayed in the New York press

December 22, 2005 March 31, 2006 May 11, 2006 May 29, 2006 In the face of lagging fundraising Quinnipiac University Poll: Assembly Member Richard On the eve of the Democratic and a reportedly inevitable Cuomo 37 percent; Green 25 Brodsky withdraws from the State Convention, there are five defeat against incumbent Hillary percent; undecided 26 percent. race in order to donate a kidney party candidates for attorney Clinton, Jeanine Pirro drops Denise O’Donnell, Richard to his 14-year-old daughter. general: former HUD Secretary out of the U.S. Senate race Brodsky, Sean P. Maloney and Andrew Cuomo, former New and instead announces her Charlie King all poll in the low York City Public Advocate Mark candidacy for New York State single digits. Green, former U.S. Attorney attorney general. Denise E. O’Donnell of Buffalo, former lieutenant governor candidate Charlie King and former Clinton administration official Sean Maloney.  MARK HALPERIN: Thank you, Fred. We are covering The Democratic Primary: Could two races today—the attorney general’s race and the the Result Have Been Different? governor’s race. And we are also covering the primaries, where they existed. In every case but the governor’s MARK BENOIT: Absolutely. When we first came into race on the Republican side, the better-funded this race our polling showed that we could definitely Democrat won and won relatively easily. Money always win. A lot of things would have to break our way, but it matters. It was a great Democratic year, and that will was a winnable race. In our mind it was always a two- be mentioned repeatedly today. person race: Mark Green and Andrew Cuomo. And I The question at the heart of what we’re going to explore know we were reminded to not always speak about the today is could someone besides the ultimate winner money factor. But of course, we were out-raised rather have won? Fred said everybody knows the campaign considerably, and that has a great deal to do with the is over. This is the time when you all can talk honestly result. and freely about what happened, in order to leave a Andrew Cuomo learned more from his defeat in 2002 historical record for academics, for other people who than any other candidate from any other defeat. That practice politics and for the public. clearly showed. He put together a great team. I think It’s a chance to learn about politics generally in New he played the humble card rather well in courting the York State and also about the state of the Republican leadership immediately after the debacle in 2002. Party in New York. We can learn about the new Mark is always and remains a very headstrong person. attorney general and the new governor—their styles, A very committed dedicated politician, a public strengths and weaknesses. We can also talk about the servant. We thought, naively perhaps, that we would newly reelected comptroller and what that episode win if we based our campaign on the issues. We felt teaches us about the state of New York politics, as well that Mark had a better record than any of the other as the people who were running for office. And then, as candidates at that time. And we thought that if we always, we can learn a little bit about the unique way could get the press to push the issues, Mark Green that the press operates in New York. would come out on top. Obviously that didn’t happen. So let me just tell you a little bit about how we’ll MARK HALPERIN: Mark, let me stop you because I operate. My colleagues will do the bulk of the want to get everybody in on this one. But the basic questioning of the campaign folks. We want as answer is yes, if things had gone differently, a different free-flowing a conversation as possible, so if you’re outcome was possible. representing a campaign and somebody says something you want to ask them about, feel free to step in. But the MARK BENOIT: Yes. Right. reporters will drive the questioning to a large extent. And then at the end we’ll take questions from anybody MARK HALPERIN: Erick Mullen, the same question not sitting here at the table. to you, representing Sean Maloney. Could have there been a different outcome? So let me start if I could with Mark, representing the Mark Green campaign, and ask you that basic ERICK MULLEN: Sure. I mean look at the numbers. question: Given the facts of who the candidates were You had two household names, these iconic figures. and what the year was like, could the outcome have Neither one of them could put this thing to bed. You been different in the Democratic primary for attorney had 25 percent undecided—which you shouldn’t have general? Could someone besides Andrew Cuomo have had with almost universal name ID. So clearly the ended up winning? arithmetic said if you could present a case to enough people, there would be room for a third candidate.

May 30, 2006 May 31, 2006 June 3, 2006 July 22, 2006 Cuomo receives the Running unopposed at the After placing third in the prior In a Quinnipiac University Poll, endorsement of the state Republican Convention, Jeanine week’s Democratic Convention Cuomo leads Pirro 66 percent Democratic Party, receiving 67 Pirro officially wins her party’s vote, O’Donnell withdraws to 30 percent. percent of the delegates’ votes nomination for attorney general. from the race without giving an at the Democratic Convention, endorsement to either Cuomo In addition to existing followed by Green. or Green. endorsements by the Sergeants Benevolent Association and the Uniformed Fire Officers Association, Cuomo gains the support of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association.

 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL

Jef Pollock, pollster for Andrew Cuomo, analyzing Cuomo’s numbers.

First and foremost, to put a fact out there that needs to be reiterated—this notion that there were a lot of problems with Andrew Cuomo in the Democratic primary is just not true. Less than one in five Democratic primary voters had a negative opinion of him. If you look at his numbers, his favorables were in the high 60s.

MARK HALPERIN: Did that change at all over time?

JEF POLLOCK: It only changed in the general election, which we’ll get to later, but his favorabilities did not change during the primary. This is one of the reasons why I never understood Mark’s strategy to go pretty harsh on Andrew and keep going. At some point one would think that you’d see some results or see something working. The reality of the data that we saw when we first did a poll in May is that Andrew was up by 16 points. I never had Andrew losing. I never had the gap anywhere smaller than 16 points. It just grew and grew. In fact, over the course of time, even after endorsement, the race did not MARK HALPERIN: Tony, do you agree with that? shrink. We never had a low lead in the race. Andrew always had a very significant lead. TONY SUBER: Yes. I totally agree about the money factor. If either Sean or Mark had the resources— MARK HALPERIN: Let me ask the Johns. Just from your because of the high dissatisfaction with some of the perspective and speaking for the party generally, did it things that Cuomo did in the past—I think, yeah. seem as if, from your point of view, anyone could have been the nominee but Andrew Cuomo? MARK HALPERIN: Jef Pollock, your colleagues believe that you could have lost. Do you think the conditions JOHN GALLAGHER: I think Mark Green had a shot at it were such that if you had run a worse campaign and but I think it was a little bit, say too little too late, not they had run a better campaign you could have lost? enough money. I think he didn’t really engage Cuomo until very late in the game and we were standing on the JEF POLLOCK: It’s hard to say. It’s hard not to say that sidelines watching that. But I think that Jef’s analysis anything is possible. I mean we’ve all been in this of Cuomo’s numbers is very accurate, particularly for game long enough to see various scenarios whereby you the primary. I think Andrew had negatives but they think a race is a fait acompli and all of a sudden things were much more general election, upstate-downstate change. The comptroller’s race is just one example of type of negatives. where we thought there certainly could be a seismic change. MARK HALPERIN: John do you want to add anything?

August 8, 2006 August 21, 2006 August 27, 2006 September 2, 2006 The New York Daily News U.S. Representative Charles The New York Times endorses Cuomo unleashes his first reports that Pirro is picking up Rangel endorses Cuomo Green, while delivering a attack ad against Green, calling steam against her Democratic and joins other prominent scathing critique of Cuomo. him a “perennial candidate” rivals. A Siena Research Democratic leaders in criticizing who held a “useless post.” It Institute poll shows Cuomo’s Green for his almost daily comes in response to attacks lead over her shrinking from 25 attacks on Cuomo, saying, “If from Green that Cuomo didn’t points to 15 points, with Cuomo you’re not going to win, don’t go far enough to protect at 50 percent and Pirro at 35 hurt the winner.” Green calls it children from pesticides while percent. a “comparison campaign.” HUD secretary.

 JOHN HAGGERTY: Our first ad, which I think went MARK HALPERIN: Were you doing research on Cuomo? up in late July, actually named Andrew Cuomo—so obviously we always really thought it was Andrew JOHN GALLAGHER: Yes. Cuomo. We didn’t even pretend that it was going to be anybody else. MARK HALPERIN: Did you come up with anything good that you would have been smart to give to the MARK HALPERIN: And did you assume he’d be the Green people? strongest general election candidate? JOHN GALLAGHER: No, because I think so much of JOHN HAGGERTY: Well, we thought that his record had Andrew’s record had been out there already in 2002. I certainly left him open to attack. But we also knew think that a difficulty for us was trying to deal with the that he was obviously the most well-funded candidate press on Cuomo’s record because it was all rehash. He and that he had the organizational support from the had been a statewide candidate before so there was no SEIU and from the Democratic Party. new news to make. MARK HALPERIN: Let me ask one more question of you. Framing the Frontrunner: During this period, during the Democratic nomination fight, were you all doing on the Cuomo, HUD, and Tobacco other candidates, on the Democratic field? MARK HALPERIN: Wayne Barrett, Village Voice, over JOHN HAGGERTY: Not really. to you.

JOHN GALLAGHER: In our campaign we were very WAYNE BARRETT: One of the things that happened focused on Cuomo because he was such a strong in the primary was that any critical examination frontrunner, and I think John’s right, I think that of Andrew Cuomo’s record at HUD was regarded being the blessed candidate was critical to that. In as a smear, and treated as one by Sean Maloney at terms of opposition research, we said that if Mark the debates. And Jef mentioned last night that the Green wins the primary we’ll deal with it then. cornerstone of the campaign was his HUD record. Why is it that the press and you guys got away with essentially portraying many legitimate issues about his performance at HUD as a smear? How did you manage ... this notion that there were a lot to achieve that, Jef? JEF POLLOCK: The first thing is that Democratic of problems with Andrew Cuomo in primary voters absolutely felt they knew Andrew Cuomo when you looked at the name identification the Democratic primary is just not numbers. They also felt like they knew Mark Green to some extent. Mark’s favorable/unfavorable numbers true. Less than one in five Democratic were quite good. But the notion that Mark Green was attacking was something that was easy for a voter to primary voters had a negative opinion accept. This notion of attack politics was something that had been around. Mark had been so familiar, of him. If you look at his numbers, his particularly in New York City, where the free press drives so many things, that the instant you even talked favorables were in the high 60s. about it as an attack it was like, “Oh yeah, that makes sense, a Mark Green attack.” —Jef Pollock

Maloney, King and Green tape a September 5, 2006 The Village Voice publishes September 6, 2006 debate and criticize Cuomo for an article on the connections Quinnipiac University Poll: Cuomo, Green and Maloney being a no-show. Says Maloney, between Cuomo and a top Cuomo 53 percent, Green 31 engage in a debate sponsored “I think he’s playing it safe and financial supporter who had percent, Maloney 18 percent. by the New York City Bar he’s got a good last name.” previously been the target of Association. Hoping to unite the party, a probe by HUD when Cuomo King drops out of the race and headed that agency. The endorses Cuomo. investigation was settled in then transfers his endorsement an allegedly questionable to Cuomo, criticizing Green arrangement brokered by for what he deems divisive Cuomo. This claim is quickly campaign attacks and “crash- seized on by Green’s camp. and-burn” tactics.

 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL

So that’s the first thing. The second thing is that and Mark began to engage there wasn’t a lot of room there was to some degree an element of—it felt like left. You guys like to run to the kids fighting the fire. So an element of vitriol. Even when an attack is leveled, that change in atmosphere did not help what we were Wayne, as you know, it can be leveled in an even- trying to do. The premise of our race was to present keeled way or it can be leveled with a heightened level better ideas with more passion to the voters and you of vitriol. And I think this added to the perception of can’t do that when everybody’s obsessed with the fight negativity. between these two guys. So we tried to break it up.

You also have the other candidates, in particular Sean, WAYNE BARRETT: How do you win a race by defending who was a wonderful asset at the end of the day for the frontrunner? Andrew, especially when he was out there saying, “You’ve got Mark Green attacking,” instead of talking ERICK MULLEN: I’m not sure we defended the about himself and his own record. frontrunner.

Finally, Andrew had a number of validators on his side WAYNE BARRETT: You did it again and again. who were pretty damn good, from to Louis Freeh, et cetera. And the voters were going to believe JEF POLLOCK: No, they didn’t actually defend Andrew. those validators, in particular somebody like a Bill WAYNE BARRETT: Clinton or a Louis Freeh, over another candidate. And I When the death penalty came up in think that’s why they fell on some deaf ears, Wayne. the debate. ERICK MULLEN: WAYNE BARRETT: Was Sean an accidental wonderful Yeah. asset? WAYNE BARRETT: He goes after Mark even though JEF POLLOCK: I wish I could tell you that there were Andrew was the guy who just spoke about the death great internal conversations. penalty. ERICK MULLEN: WAYNE BARRETT: After all, he’s at Mario’s firm. But Mark started it. JEF POLLOCK: JEF POLLOCK: He’s at Mario’s firm, but when asked As I recall from the debate, the reason who the greatest governor was he didn’t say Mario that he attacked Mark on the death penalty was Cuomo, so just to be clear, I can’t speak to that. I am because there was some reasonable question that was almost certain there were no private conversations. asked and somehow Mark turned it into an attack. I’m You’ll have to ask those guys from the Maloney just trying to remember— campaign, but I do not believe that Sean was out there WAYNE BARRETT: You remember better than I do. as a stalking horse to help Andrew Cuomo. MARK BENOIT: We always thought that one of the If you looked at the data, Wayne, in a two-way race reasons Sean Maloney got into the race was to be a when you took away everybody else and it was a Mark stalking horse for Andrew Cuomo based on Mark’s Green/Andrew Cuomo race, Andrew was winning by record. Particularly in the lesbian and gay community. 25 points from a very early time period and that never He had the best record out there. So looking at the changed. And he was above 50 percent. poll numbers we figured if it’s a tight race, Sean’s in ERICK MULLEN: You know, Wayne, this is the second there, he pulls three, four, five points from Mark and time. When I did Golisano, I was accused of being a therefore Andrew Cuomo’s the winner. stalking horse for Cuomo, too. Look, I’m a gambler but Mark started a year out from the primary talking about I’m not an idiot. When those two guys began to fight his record and did that consistently for months. And so it’s

September 9, 2006 September 12, 2006 September 27, 2006 October 7, 2006 A /NY1 poll shows Cuomo wins the Democratic Jeanine Pirro admits to being The Daily News reports that Cuomo leading Green 46 primary with 53 percent of under federal investigation for Cuomo has nearly twice the percent to 30 percent, with the vote. Green garnered 33 plotting to secretly tape record campaign cash of opponent Maloney garnering 9 percent. percent and Maloney received her husband to find out whether Pirro. He is reported to have 10 percent. he was having an affair. She $2.4 million in his campaign denies any recordings were ever chest, compared with Pirro’s made. $1.26 million.

 accelerated. It had to have a balance to it in order to As soon as we would bring something even get press there in the first place. I can’t tell you how many press events we had where no press showed up, a gap in Andrew’s HUD record that up.

you could drive a truck through, we JEF POLLOCK: But do you remember what the first ad were attacked by the Cuomo campaign. was? The first comparative ad, the subject of it? MARK BENOIT: Our first ad? It was the mean Green attack machine. JEF POLLOCK: Yeah.

—Mark Benoit MARK BENOIT: Yes. Yes.

JEF POLLOCK: Which was? not accurate to say that Mark didn’t speak about his own record and his own qualifications. Anyone who knows MARK BENOIT: Well, let me go back. Our first ad was Mark Green knows he will speak about his own record going to be—our first ad was upstate and it was sort of and his own qualifications. He does so rather eloquently. warm and fuzzy about Mark Green.

When you’re looking at the polling numbers, we had to JEF POLLOCK: I’m sorry. The first comparative ad in the engage. We had to engage when we did in order to drag city. Cuomo down and pull us up. We did it in a comparative fashion. We didn’t do a personal attack at all. MARK BENOIT: The first comparative ad in New York City, I believe we went after him on pesticides? WAYNE BARRETT: Mark, let me be a little rude for a second. Would you address the question that I raised JEF POLLOCK: No. at the beginning? How was it that any critique of the MARK BENOIT: Or was it HUD? It was tobacco. HUD record was turned by Sean and by Jef into a smear? How was it done? How was it pulled off? JEF POLLOCK: Smoke shops. Right. MARK BENOIT: Rather successfully, I might add. It was MARK BENOIT: It was the smoke shops. frustrating for us because again we wanted to engage simply, purely, and singularly on the issues. We didn’t JEF POLLOCK: But here’s the problem with the smoke want to bring personalities into that. As soon as we shop issues. Essentially Mark Green was accusing would bring something up, a gap in Andrew’s HUD Andrew Cuomo of stuffing cigarettes into the mouths record that you could drive a truck through, we were of kids. I mean that’s how the attack translated. The attacked by the Cuomo campaign. It was the mean facts are weird and discombobulated, but it’s just a Green attack machine. And I think Jef makes a valid patently ridiculous charge. That somehow Andrew point, going back to the 2001 mayoral race where Cuomo is essentially in favor of giving smokes to kids. some people reported Mark Green being mean and attacking. And I think that added, in my opinion, to some of the people in the press corps saying, “You know what, you So that had some resonance and I think the press may want to call it comparative, you may want to say picked that up. It was very frustrating for us to have a it’s on the ‘issues,’ but it just doesn’t smell right.” And I, press conference. And again, we’re a down ballot race. personally, thought that was a mistake. We had to do something a little heightened, a little

October 7, 2006 focused on her alleged plot to October 11, 2006 October 14, 2006 record her husband’s reported A Quinnipiac University poll Cuomo agrees to debate Pirro Cuomo and Pirro square off infidelity. Women were no more indicates that Cuomo leads in two venues. in the first of two televised likely than men to support Pirro. Pirro 50 percent to 31 percent, debates. Cuomo leads 53 percent to compared with 52 percent to 27 percent among women, as 29 percent in late August. compared with his 54 percent Forty percent of respondents to 25 percent lead in August. indicate they didn’t know enough about Pirro to form an opinion, and 33 percent said they were unaware of the federal wiretapping probe

 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL

Wayne Barrett, from the Village Voice, ponders the way that Mark Green came to be portrayed as a perennial loser.

that Mark Green was a person who’d been there, done that. Who had been around the block and run a bunch of times.

Elliot Spitzer had never won elected office either, Wayne. I mean that’s not a prerequisite.

WAYNE BARRETT: Every time I talked to Andrew he himself discussed Mark as a perennial loser.

JEF POLLOCK: I can’t speak to your private conversations with Andrew, obviously.

WAYNE BARRETT: No. I’m just saying you guys did pump this up and work this.

JEF POLLOCK: But I’m telling you that I talked to real people, voters who don’t pay attention and read things every single day, and there was already a belief out there that Mark had been a candidate who had been around many times. And yes, he had won a couple of times—but Wayne, he’d also lost.

WAYNE BARRETT: The other great anomaly to me WAYNE BARRETT: Did you do that anecdotally or did was that Mark Green has won three citywide races you do focus groups? including a Democratic primary. Your candidate had never won any election in his life and somehow he JEF POLLOCK: There were focus groups. managed with the help of the press to convey that Mark Green was the perennial loser. How did you pull WAYNE BARRETT: Which communities did you do that one off? them in?

JEF POLLOCK: Well again, I can’t say how we convinced all the great New York City press corps of these things. There are a lot of very good reporters out here who can But here’s the problem with the smoke defend themselves. But the notion of Mark being a perennial candidate was also something that people felt shop issues. Essentially Mark Green was when you went and talked to them. When you went north of the Mason-Dixon line, and you went to places accusing Andrew Cuomo of stuffing upstate in particular and you asked about Mark Green, it was as if—I remember when I was doing focus cigarettes into the mouths of kids ... it’s groups for John Edwards in Iowa and we were talking about Dick Gephardt, and they were like, “Didn’t he just a patently ridiculous charge. run in 1972?” And there was an absolute feeling out there, forget about what the Cuomo campaign did, but —Jef Pollock

October 17, 2006 A Siena poll indicates Cuomo’s October 18, 2006 October 20, 2006 lead over Pirro has shrunk Cuomo and Pirro trade sharp In yet another political twist, A Quinnipiac University poll from 17 to 13 points since language in the final of two reports on finds that Cuomo leads Pirro 55 last month. In a somewhat scheduled debates. allegations that surfaced about percent to 34 percent among predictable fashion, both the substance and nature likely voters. candidates are polling high of Republican U.S. Senate negatives. The percentage candidate John Spencer’s of voters with an unfavorable complaint to New York Attorney opinion of Pirro grew in the General Spitzer’s office about last month from 32 percent to Pirro’s conduct. He alleges 41 percent; Cuomo’s negative that she shielded corrupt rating rose from 35 percent to officials from prosecution and 42 percent. retaliated against her political critics in 2000.  ... was there ever a discussion about Engaging the Frontrunner: Politics without Personal what was seen as a potential real Attacks

problem with Andrew Cuomo, his MARK HALPERIN: Maggie Haberman of the Cuomo personal life? family’s favorite newspaper, the New York Post. MAGGIE HABERMAN: Thanks, Mark. I’m going to start with Benoit but I’m going to actually ask Maloney this —Maggie Haberman as well. You were saying—John Haggerty touched on this before—you were saying that you knew you had JEF POLLOCK: I was upstate. We did focus groups to engage early. I think the perception among the rest upstate and we did focus groups in the city. Both. of us was that no one engaged Andrew Cuomo very early in the Democratic primary at all, on his record or WAYNE BARRETT: And what were the kinds of things anything else. you learned about Mark Green that you didn’t know before? And everyone was talking behind the scenes and off the record about the fact that Andrew’s HUD record was JEF POLLOCK: As you know focus groups are anecdotal the big problem for him. But no one really presented it at best, but I do think there was some notion that well. So I guess my question for you is two-part: one, Mark had seen his time pass in terms of his time for why did Mark wait so long? There was a perception office. I think that there was, amongst Democratic primary voters, an actual liking for Andrew Cuomo. And let me take it one step further. I wasn’t with Andrew in 2002, I wasn’t part of the campaign. But at the end of the 2002 campaign, even though it didn’t go particularly well for Andrew Cuomo, his numbers were never bad. There’s always this myth that African- American voters were very angry at him for running against Carl McCall. It’s not true. The numbers for him were actually quite good.

The difference is that in 2002 people thought Carl McCall should be the candidate. And therefore he was going to win. Carl McCall was always winning in the primary in 2002 by double digits. It was the same thing for Andrew Cuomo this time. Voters thought and believed that Andrew Cuomo was going to be the nominee. And they were behind him. That’s why he ended up winning two-thirds of the convention with a lot of political support and a lot of muscle.

Maggie Haberman, from the New York Post, asks whether the Green and Maloney camps ever considered using Cuomo’s personal life as a tactic in their campaigns.

October 22, 2006 October 29, 2006 November 5, 2006 November 7, 2006 The New York Times offers a The New York Times reports In a Newsday/NY1 poll, Cuomo Cuomo handily beats Pirro, 58 tepid endorsement of Cuomo. that the candidates have set leads Pirro, 61 percent to 33 percent to 40 percent. a record for fundraising in the percent. race, raising a combined $12.4 million, most of which has come from individuals.

Newsday endorses Cuomo.

 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL that his heart really wasn’t in this race—so was it? And number two, was there ever a discussion about Why would the man who did “kill it, what was seen as a potential real problem with Andrew Cuomo, his personal life? Was there ever a discussion kill it” in 2001 shrink from Andrew about using that? Cuomo’s personal life? MARK BENOIT: Let me answer the second part first. We made a decision early on not to engage Cuomo —Wayne Barrett regarding his personal life. That’s something that Mark refused to do, steadfastly. Believe me, I brought it up. And it was brought up more than once. Because that’s MARK BENOIT: Boy, that’s an interesting question. I what you do in campaigns. He refused to engage on think that’s one that Mark Green has to answer. Mark that level. did tell me, what he learned from the mayor’s race was that he had to go with his gut more and not all the WAYNE BARRETT: Tell us about how you made the consultants and all the people around him in 2001 case. saying, “You have to do this. You have to do the ‘kill MARK BENOIT: Please, Mark. We’re down 16 points. it’. This is the only way you’re going to do it. The only way you’re going to win other than Bloomberg being MAGGIE HABERMAN: Was there an argument made abducted.” And we didn’t have the money to do that. that there was a legitimate issue in something like the child support issue? Did that come up at all? So that’s what happened. He felt he was burned in 2001, and so in 2006 he was going to listen to his MARK BENOIT: Again, it came up, as part of our own instincts, perhaps his own family. Obviously, research. And again, Mark Green shot it down before he listened to us because we’re paid to give him our five words were uttered out of my mouth. It was just opinion but he went with his gut. cut out. That’s just the way it was. We chose to engage after the convention because it was all we could do MAGGIE HABERMAN: Ask the same question of Erick to try to get that 25 percent at the convention at about Sean. Sean had raised money. He held very few, Buffalo. All our time, energy, and resources were spent if any, that I can remember real press events. He was toward that goal. So in the meantime, obviously, our not seen very often. Why did he not engage more? researchers are going through the HUD record, the Why did he not go after the frontrunner more early on? pesticides issue, this issue, that issue. They were all ERICK MULLEN: A couple of things. First of all Wayne, being brought up. They were all being researched. They the thing about Mark Green being a perennial were all being cultivated. But again, you’re looking at candidate—I don’t think that’s even subjective. I think a campaign that had a bit of a money gap. We were there’s got to be some sort of definition. Mark’s going short staffed. We just had to focus on getting that 25 to fall into that. percent. That’s why we didn’t engage really in a hard- nosed fashion until after the convention. And in terms of attacking Andrew or either one of these guys early on, it didn’t make any sense. Our MAGGIE HABERMAN: And was Mark’s heart in this theory of the race was to present an alternative, to talk race? about issues and things that were of concern to people. MARK BENOIT: Absolutely. Absolutely. When he called We thought that there was a gap with the absence me, I was sunning myself in back in March and of Giuliani and with Pataki leaving, and that the he said, “Benoit you’ve got to come up here, we’re going security moms would be looking for somebody to go to win this.” And he gave me a 20-minute spiel on why to. So we used a lot of the YouTube. We did do a lot of he could win. And I’ve known Mark. I did his race in events. We focused on things like Internet predators, ’97. I’ve known him for years. His heart was definitely and violence against women, and respect and protect in it. Now, was there some erosion once the fundraising agenda, and about women and girls. And that was numbers started coming in, and we saw that there the theory of the race—it was never for the third was clearly donor fatigue in our case? I’m sure. That’s place guy to get in and try to tear down the first place inevitable. But I still think his heart was in it until the guy because I don’t think anybody would have even last. It wasn’t easy for him to call Andrew on the night listened to us. And that would have disqualified Sean of the primary. That was a heartbreaking moment for as a serious candidate. him. But he did it. No, his heart was in it. MAGGIE HABERMAN: And was there ever a discussion WAYNE BARRETT: Why would the man who did “kill about going after Andrew on the personal issues, or no? it, kill it” in 2001 shrink from Andrew Cuomo’s personal life?

10 ERICK MULLEN: No. We had Mark Green, the “kill MAGGIE HABERMAN: Were you surprised, was the it” guy, in the race. We didn’t even spend the time Cuomo campaign surprised that this didn’t come up or money thinking about it. Which is a personal earlier? Were you preparing for it to come up at all? disappointment to me, but— JEF POLLOCK: Not necessarily from the opposing MAGGIE HABERMAN: Why is it a personal campaigns, actually. disappointment to you? MAGGIE HABERMAN: From your own campaign? ERICK MULLEN: Well, because it’s so much fun and easy Whose campaign is going to bring it up? to go after people. And Sean didn’t want to do it. JEF POLLOCK: No. We thought you would, Maggie, MAGGIE HABERMAN: Let me just rephrase the last of course. Because we know you. We did not expect it question. Was there any discussion about a legitimate necessarily to come up from the other campaigns. corner of this where it wasn’t strictly a personal issue, given the nature of the attorney general’s job? WAYNE BARRETT: Why not? Has something changed in New York politics? I mean if it were 15 years ago, I ERICK MULLEN: It was a very short discussion and more think it would have come up. academic, but with Mark Green in the race we just didn’t spend any time or money on it. JEF POLLOCK: Because it was played out. Because it had already been there. I mean, all the stories about MARK BENOIT: Maggie, let me just say I could visualize Andrew Cuomo’s personal life had been strewn across the headlines on your paper and others if we would Page Six over days and days for the voters. So one of have engaged in a personal fashion. In fact, it gave me the things that we do know about New York politics some sort of solace late at night to see, “divorce” or is people like to cover things that are new. And when something like that. I probably wouldn’t have hesitated things are old and rehashed people tend to look at it to go there. But Mark Green did not allow me to do so. and say, “You know what, we’ve been down that road. What are we covering that’s new here?” So we were JEF POLLOCK: Let’s also not forget that Maggie’s paper preparing for a lot of things, but I’m telling you that had a number of those headlines during the actual Andrew’s personal life wasn’t the thing we were overly divorce period, for Andrew Cuomo. So again the voters concerned about. actually were familiar with some of that stuff and what it meant. And when we talked to them, they told us it MARK BENOIT: I think if had it come up, you would was largely irrelevant. have had headlines for a couple of days and it would have been damaging. MAGGIE HABERMAN: How much testing on that issue did you do? JEF POLLOCK: I don’t agree.

JEF POLLOCK: Very little, actually. It was a matter MARK BENOIT: I think I based this on the number of of what came up in the focus groups when talking times I was questioned by the press on that particular to people and asking. And people would say, “Yeah, issue. they had some marital problems.” I mean, come on. I remember your paper Cuomolot, the end of Cuomolot. JEF POLLOCK: Well, yeah. Living through that here as a New York City resident. So people did have some notion of it and also thought MARK BENOIT: So obviously they had an interest. And it was totally irrelevant. they would have pushed this story.

MARK BENOIT: I will say one thing. I mean we did try JEF POLLOCK: You guys are all smarter than me. Tell to get Mark’s wife with him as publicly, as much as me what the headline would have been? possible, obviously to build an advantage. WAYNE BARRETT: Mark, be more specific in response to what Maggie was getting at. Had the candidate been willing to go there, how would you have framed it? What would the message have been? What would the Our theory of the race was to present facts have been? an alternative, to talk about issues and MARK BENOIT: The message would be, “Can you trust this person to be attorney general given his personal things that were of concern to people. history?” Simple. Plain and simple. End of story. WAYNE BARRETT: Which parts, though, of the —Erick Mullen personal history?

11 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL

MARK BENOIT: The divorce. You can’t back yourself into a successful WAYNE BARRETT: Just being divorced? attack. You can’t hint at it by bringing MARK BENOIT: Just the divorce. around the wife and mentioning the JEF POLLOCK: No. I mean that’s—who cares? wife at almost every opportunity. It’s MARK BENOIT: No, no. Just the divorce, the coverage it got. The court papers, the documents, all of it. But it’s too subtle. You need mass casualty a moot issue because we chose not to go there.

WAYNE BARRETT: You’d have to detach yourself almost ordinance in New York City to make from reality to make this impactful. You’d basically have to call him a deadbeat dad on television and at a this attack work. press conference with a caricature blowup here to get anything. And you’d have to reinforce it with 1,500, —Wayne Barrett 1,800 GRPs, which is why it was a waste.

You can’t back yourself into a successful attack. runs around the state from 1995 to 1997 doing every You can’t hint at it by bringing around the wife and rubber chicken dinner in the state. And it pays off. mentioning the wife at almost every opportunity. It’s too subtle. You need mass casualty ordinance in New Well, Andrew Cuomo did the same thing and worked York City to make this attack work. And so you’d have very, very hard. And there are lots and lots of county to be willing to shake hands with the devil, cross the chairs who will tell you that they were touched, meaning line and go after Andrew on that, to be impactful. a phone call or physical visit by Andrew Cuomo during this period of time. So the politics definitely paid off. MARK BENOIT: And again, our candidate just wouldn’t Certainly it would be silly for me to underestimate the allow it to happen. 1199 [SEIU United Healthcare Workers] endorsement, which was a huge signal to political insiders that Andrew WAYNE BARRETT: A man who shakes hands with the Cuomo was clearly the person to beat. devil every day. And finally, one of the most significant moments Building a Campaign: Lessons for me was when the Westside Reformers, who in theory were Mark Green’s core constituency, part from the Past of his base—, , —these guys came and endorsed BEN SMITH: This is really a question for Jef and for Andrew Cuomo. That was when it was clear that there Mark, about what your guys were doing for the last was a tectonic political shift toward Andrew. four or five years. Because it seems to me, really in retrospect now, that Andrew had won the campaign BEN SMITH: How long after 2002 did he start running by last December. And that the most important things for this job? Did he start doing dinners? happened before then. I don’t really have any idea what Andrew was doing all day. And I only have some JEF POLLOCK: I don’t know that. I would not be able to idea of what Mark was doing all day. But I guess I’m give you the right answer, Ben. interested in what Andrew was doing right and what Mark was doing wrong from both of you. MARK BENOIT: Day after the defeat, I would think. 1199 was the big kahuna. When that happened we all JEF POLLOCK: I think Mark wrote like 18 books in that sort of sagged a bit. And 1199 played a significant role time or something. in the fact that Cuomo got Nadler, Schneiderman, Stringer. Clearly, Dennis Rivera and Jennifer BEN SMITH: Two. Cunningham were engaged in this campaign. This was not a paper endorsement. This was a mission for JEF POLLOCK: I can’t speak to everything that Andrew Andrew Cuomo. And it bears out in the number and was doing as I wasn’t there that whole time. I do know strength of endorsements that he got. Most of them that the lessons of 2002 were the same lessons that delivered via 1199. So 1199 is immensely powerful and Elliot Spitzer learned in 1994. You lose a primary, the we wish we would have had them. Then maybe I’d have Democratic primary voters tell you that they’re looking a different answer for your question. for you to give them a different level of communication, a different level of touching. So Elliot Spitzer goes and

12 As I said in the beginning, Andrew Cuomo learned most JEF POLLOCK: But I do think that Mark had been from his defeat and started almost immediately to repair around this block a number of times. And there’s only the situation. And it’s almost easier when you lose in a so many times that you can redo the thing. Andrew rather spectacular fashion to go to people and be humble had lost one race. And that’s it. And so he had not been and be contrite. And I think he did a very good job of going back and forth to people and having to redo that. these relationships again and again and again. So I think that certainly there was a great deal of outreach. Mark Green, of course, did the same thing. He went Again, I wasn’t a part of a lot of it. around in the state. He talked to the county leaders. He did all the homework and legwork necessary. I can The Charlie Rangel endorsement was significant. More only say that Andrew Cuomo had a more compelling significant to me were some of the things Charlie then story. With 1199, with Mario, he just had more said. As we all know, Charlie is as unscripted as they firepower. We didn’t. We had the strength of Mark come. So Charlie himself said, “Mark, another attack.” Green’s convictions and his personality and that didn’t And when it comes out of Charlie’s mouth it has a work out. different ring and a different tone to it. And also it brings up some of the past stuff. BEN SMITH: Do you think Mark was contrite enough? So there was not anger from the voters’ perspective. MARK BENOIT: Yes. I don’t think it’s so much a fault, But I think that obviously Andrew did a very, very but when you have five, ten seconds or two minutes or good job of working the politics. And it’d be silly to say even five minutes with a person you don’t really know, that 1199 didn’t help. The notion that 1199 delivered you have to get your message out. So Mark will talk the endorsement of people like Jerry Nadler, I think, is about himself. He’ll talk about, “This is what I’ve done. grossly overstated. Consumer advocate, blah, blah, blah, Nader.” And sometimes there’s not enough room for, “How are the MARK BENOIT: I think that Nadler actually said, wife and kids? How are you doing? Hey you look great, “Please stop attacking.” Just one more thing, quickly. nice tan.” That’s a problem. When you’re running for Obviously the endorsement of Carl McCall would have office and you only have a limited time, you talk about been huge for any candidate in the race. And believe yourself. You’ve got to remember the other person. And me, we chased, and we thought he would eventually perhaps Andrew did a better job at that, I don’t know. come over to us and we were quite surprised that he He didn’t talk to me. didn’t.

BEN SMITH: And more specifically on that point, both of BEN SMITH: Do you know why he didn’t? these guys came out of races, Mark in ’01 and Andrew in ’02, where they were seen as being critically damaged MARK BENOIT: I do not know. with African-Americans. I’m not sure in either case that necessarily translated to the mass of voters. But certainly black leadership in was angry at both of them. And I guess I’m interested in how Mark failed to repair that and Andrew repaired it.

MARK BENOIT: Our polling didn’t show that Mark was really damaged that much by it.

BEN SMITH: I don’t mean in the polls.

MARK BENOIT: There was no absence of African- American leadership for Mark Green. Again, I think once you get a Charlie Rangel, you get all his team, too. And all of a sudden there’s this appearance of a groundswell of support for Andrew Cuomo. But we worked very hard, and Mark worked very hard since 2001 to repair any rip. He met, he called, he did everything he could, and I think the fact that we got those endorsements shows that he was quite successful.

Mark Benoit, senior staffer for Mark Green for Attorney General, discusses campaign strategy.

13 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL

Tony Suber, general consultant for Sean Maloney for Attorney General, describes the way that communities of color were taken for granted in the election.

in this race. One of the things about a race that is a presumed blowout is that voters assume it’s a blowout and therefore don’t get engaged. So I don’t know that it’s any different for a voter upstate than for one in central . And I do think that Andrew Cuomo made a concerted effort. The contrition thing that people have talked about with Andrew Cuomo and the outreach he did was something that people—political leaders I’m talking about—felt was very real. And I believe was very real and a different approach.

I can’t say how they received those calls from Mark Green. I don’t know. But clearly they were not received the same way when you look at the results.

Republican Expectations: Limited Party Support

MARK HALPERIN: All right, there’s a lot of stuff on the table here and we will return to the primary when we go to audience questions at the end, but I think we JEF POLLOCK: Well, he was with Denise. need to move on. I want to start with the Johns, and TONY SUBER: My take on Ben’s statement and the ask you this. Much has been made of the notion that African-American community is a little bit different. this was the one race that seemed winnable, before the Jef, I think you’re dealing with the numbers. My take comptroller’s race came into play for the Republican comes from talking to people and living in those Party. What were your expectations given the help communities and going through the city with the you would get from Governor Pataki, from the state communities. I don’t think that there was a real effort Republican Party, from the national Republican Party, to engage in the black community. I think a lot of it to try to win this race? And where did you get those was just taken for granted. Like in a lot of elections, the expectations from? minority community is taken for granted in terms of JOHN GALLAGHER: I think first it’s important to know outreach. that John and I came into the race late in the game. I think both camps, on the surface, reached out to John at the end of July and I very near the end of elected officials for validation. But the average black August. She had had the false start with the Senate voter was not really engaged in this election. They race. I think her attorney general’s race at the time knew Cuomo. They knew his father. And he had the was adrift. And that would have been more damaging resources to get a message out. And black folks are except for the fact that the primary was going on, and very, very forgiving—in a lot of instances to a fault. the focus was on that. So she had the ability to recover So yes, there was anger about the ’02 race. Yes, there from being adrift. was anger about the ’01 race. Yes, Andrew ran a very, I think everybody knew that because of the condition very good race. He was better than Mark in terms of of the state party we weren’t going to get any help the perception that, “Hey, I could have done better in financially. They would say—Steve Minarik, who ’02.” And Mark was unable to get that message out, I have a lot of respect for, would say, “Look I’ll do or challenge the perception that he was as arrogant as the papers portrayed him to be. I’m sorry, I think Joe Voter, the average voter in central Brooklyn and southeast and had no real stock in this race. Of course there wasn’t enough engagement in the I don’t think that there was a real effort race. to engage in the black community. JEF POLLOCK: But the average voter on the Upper West Side didn’t have any engagement in this race. I think a lot of it was just taken for The average voter upstate didn’t have any engagement granted.

—Tony Suber 14 general election. Andrew Cuomo, peculiarly as far I think everybody knew that because as I can tell, never endorsed . From your end Jef, why is it that he never endorsed Alan Hevesi, of the condition of the state party we even before this issue came front and center? Then would both of you comment on how the Hevesi issue weren’t going to get any help financially. impacted the attorney general race? —John Gallagher JEF POLLOCK: I actually don’t know why. I don’t think there’s any great plot there, Wayne. I actually think it just didn’t happen. Alan actually popped onto the stage on primary night when I think Andrew was supposed everything I can.” And I would say, “Well there’s really to give a speech and the family was supposed to hug nothing you can do. You have no money; you don’t and everybody was supposed to walk off. And then have staff.” They were struggling to get by. So we knew on walked Alan and gave a victory speech on primary that we were flying solo. night. I don’t think there was any intentional lack of MARK HALPERIN: What about from the governor? endorsement. It just never happened.

JOHN GALLAGHER: The governor’s endorsement was WAYNE BARRETT: Did Andrew resent that? That Alan about all he had the ability to do. I think he treated all did that? the Republican candidates equally. He raised money JEF POLLOCK: No, I don’t think so. There was never for Faso. He did do a fundraiser for Jeanine. I think any discussion of resentment. Alan was going to win that it’s very important to point out that particularly by 80/20. Alan was a very popular comptroller. I did in New York, the deck was very much stacked against Bill Mulrow’s race against Alan in the primary where any Republican candidate from the lowest level to I learned just how hard it is to be an underfunded statewide races this year—so aligning yourself with candidate running against somebody who has a lot the party, or with major players in the party, wasn’t of name ID. It’s very, very hard to win those races. necessarily going to be helpful. And so Jeanine Pirro And Bill Mulrow ended up winning every county was much more about personality and the individual upstate or something like that. And still you can’t win. than the party. It shows how hard it is to beat candidates with New JOHN HAGGERTY: By the time I’d got on to the race, York City name ID. If I had to guess, Wayne, it was we had already given up on the national party because more accidental than anything, on the Cuomo/Hevesi it was clear they weren’t putting any resources into any side. It ended up giving him an ability to say I never New York races. Obviously when they did finally do endorsed the guy, which was true. that it was going to be for congressional races only. But It wasn’t going to impact Andrew, I think, until Jeanine was actually raising money on her own and the Pirro folks put up a clever boxing match with doing a pretty respectable job. She had raised about newspaper headlines and Cuomo/Hevesi. It was a very $2,800,000 by the July filing, just for the attorney clever attempt to tie Andrew to Alan Hevesi. general’s race, which was pretty impressive. There were a couple of problems with it. Number one, But again, like John said, we really never counted on I think you guys had about a nickel to put behind the party support and I think that gave us a certain level ad so nobody actually saw it. And secondly, Andrew of freedom to position Jeanine more in the center and had, throughout his campaign, done a very good to talk about the fact that she, like Elliot Spitzer, was job of making sure he was seen as the best heir to a prosecutor. And people said you’re going to anger Elliot Spitzer—whether that was through the Spitzer certain chairmen upstate. But who cares? We weren’t endorsement commercial, or through all the discussion. getting the support financially and in other ways that And voters believed that Andrew Cuomo was the best we needed from them and we knew that. person to take on the fights of Elliot Spitzer. That was MARK HALPERIN: Wayne. the single most important thing that they wanted. They wanted somebody to clean up Albany and carry on the big fights of Elliot Spitzer. Chauffeur-Gate: The Hevesi Issue WAYNE BARRETT: The Cuomo failure to endorse Hevesi was an accident? WAYNE BARRETT: I want to go back to something that you said at the outset and talk a minute about JEF POLLOCK: That’s my knowledge, yeah. I mean I the comptroller’s race in connection with your race. can’t say for sure, but to my knowledge—in the same The Hevesi issue became an issue in the course of the way that it just doesn’t happen because somebody doesn’t need endorsement. Somebody who’s going to

15 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL win 80/20, it’s not like they’re calling around asking for a lot of endorsements. And so that’s my knowledge The Cuomo failure to endorse Hevesi of it, and I don’t think I’m wrong. was an accident? MARK HALPERIN: In a campaign that seemed to revolve a lot around sex, at least at your end, I don’t want to —Wayne Barrett refer to these guys as the two Johns. But what would you say was the impact of the Hevesi issue as you guys saw it? I’m interested in Andrew or Jef’s comments corruption and had gotten into a pissing match with on this too. Did you guys regard this as an authentic Elliot Spitzer over the issue. And so the charge was governmental question, or did you see it simply as a preposterous on the face. It may seem nice, I’m a piece of political strategy? prosecutor, I’m going to prosecute, da-da-da-da-da-da a big shot. But she had said that the attorney general JOHN GALLAGHER: First of all, the one thing that didn’t have the power to do it. Hevesi did do was get all of Jeanine’s personal stuff off the front page of the newspaper, which was a good And so even if there had been the weight of dollars to thing. On the downside, the Republican Party at put behind it, I think we could have beat back that that time didn’t have anything to rally around, and charge incredibly easily as we did during the debate. I was just kind of hanging out there. Even though the think Andrew performed very well by and large in the investigation about Jeanine deflated her candidacy debates with Jeanine. And that was part of it. So I think within the party a little bit, there were still people who Jeanine was frankly a little bit screwed on that level. viewed her as the best candidate and she energized people personally. Republican Strategy And what Hevesi did—all of a sudden people in the MAGGIE HABERMAN: How involved was Al Pirro in party jumped on Callaghan. And I said to people in the informally advising Jeanine (who the Cuomo campaign party, “Who are you kidding? The only difference is he’s pointedly started calling Mrs. Pirro during the general going to lose by 6 or 16 instead of 60.” Alphonse started election) in the campaign prior to the investigation raising money for Callaghan. So for about ten days there becoming public? And without the investigation was everybody jumping on the Callaghan bandwagon. existing what was the strategy going to be for the final And I didn’t think that he was a serious enough five weeks of the campaign? How were you going to go candidate or that there was enough time—even if they after Andrew Cuomo? did raise enough money—to catch up with Hevesi. JOHN GALLAGHER: So it had that negative effect. It took the attention off Al’s involvement, as far as I know, of Jeanine within the party. I think it was a serious prior to when I got there and after I arrived was zero. governmental issue in the campaign, particularly I don’t think anybody viewed him in any way as a since he was the comptroller. I think for other elected positive. I can’t tell you what went on at home. But officials it wouldn’t have been such an issue, but he was he did not come to campaign headquarters. He never supposed to be the watchdog against these things. appeared with Jeanine. He did not participate in any meetings. I mean, just about everybody realized that he Andrew never really took a position on it. Spitzer made was radioactive in terms of politics. a very clear decision to revoke his endorsement. Hillary made a clear decision, very black and white, to stand As for the strategy before the investigation, I think that by Alan Hevesi and that was the end of that. What it was that she provides balance. There’s been a long Cuomo did was never take a position either way. He history for decades of having elected officials from the said he would wait for a referral. other party in statewide office for balance. And also she’s more qualified as a lawyer. Some people will say, So we were able to take that and club him over the “Oh you know, the attorney general is much more head with it. Jeanine used the aggressive prosecutor than being a prosecutor,” and I would agree with that, position and said, “I wouldn’t wait for a referral, I highlighting her prosecutorial experience. Andrew’s would investigate. That’s what prosecutors do, that’s overall legal record is very, very thin. So his experience what attorney generals do.” And Andrew just hung out was always part of the plan. in that position and never really changed it. And so the whole world’s taking a position on it and Andrew just She’s a woman from a key suburban county with kind of stood there. very high media exposure on Fox TV, Court TV, talking about all these issues. And also she was the JEF POLLOCK: But the problem with that position was only candidate in terms of looking at the Democratic that Jeanine in the past had said that the attorney Party who wasn’t from New York City. She was general didn’t have the authority to investigate public born and raised in Elmira. She went to college in

16 Buffalo. She went to law school in Albany and settled to finish the race and stay in the race, that’s evidence in Westchester. So you could make an argument, that it worked because somebody last night was talking particularly outside of New York City, that this is about being roadkill. We really should have been balanced politically and geographically. It’s balanced roadkill on September 28, and we weren’t. in gender. It’s balanced as prosecutors are a little bit of a different kind of politician because they’re lawyers Aiding, Abetting, or Absent: first in a lot of cases. So I think the strategy before the investigation was to make all those contrasts. Mario Cuomo and Al Pirro

MAGGIE HABERMAN: In retrospect, do you think it was MAGGIE HABERMAN: For Jef, in terms of informal a mistake for her to keep talking publicly about the advisors, you mentioned 1199 and the role it played, investigation? To do the ad? but you didn’t mention the role that Mario Cuomo had in terms of lining up support for Andrew and helping JOHN GALLAGHER: I’ll let John answer the majority out. Mario Cuomo was very much, publicly, a part of of that, but let me just say no because I think she Andrew’s 2002 campaign, much to Andrew’s chagrin, had to tackle it head-on to deal with it effectively. as he has since said publicly. And I don’t think any other one candidate or any other communications director would have been He was very rarely seen this time. I’m wondering if you as successful, because both the candidate and John can describe how that played itself out, because there are enormously talented in terms of the press. And were a few blips where Mario did talk, like when he once the issue went away, and it took a good two to resurrected the coat holder comment at a Westchester three weeks to get back on track, she stopped talking dinner. about it. And even when she was asked about it, she JEF POLLOCK: always said, “Let’s talk about the race, let’s talk about That was early. whatever.” But you couldn’t avoid talking about it for MAGGIE HABERMAN: It wasn’t that early. It was over two or three weeks. the summer. JOHN HAGGERTY: I obviously don’t think it was mistake, JEF POLLOCK: That’s early to me. even in retrospect, because if I did we would have stopped. We didn’t have a choice. One of the interesting MAGGIE HABERMAN: It wasn’t last year. I mean two things about the Callaghan/Hevesi race when all the years ago. stuff swirling around the driver broke, was that it was good in that it got Jeanine off the front page. But it was JEF POLLOCK: Okay. Maggie always knows it all. I also bad that it got Jeanine off the front page. Because don’t—not having been a part of the we were getting to a place where we could have gone the way many other advisors are. The Cuomos are very back to talking about the campaign. And we could have good. They’re people who are extraordinarily loyal. had Jeanine herself talking about Andrew’s record at And I’m new to this game. So I can’t speak to the old HUD. And you would have covered it. stuff. Was Mario around for briefings, and discussions, or coming to campaign meetings? No, he wasn’t. The problem, obviously, became that everybody was writing about Callaghan and Hevesi. For the three weeks after September 27, you weren’t going to write about anything else. Nobody was going to do anything else and we just had to confront it head-on and she had to be everywhere talking about it.

The other thing is when Jeanine’s on TV, there is really nobody more effective at talking to a camera. There was a decision to try to go live at 5 o’clock the day the investigation broke. And that was also why she went on Diana Williams and why she did Gabe Pressman in the immediate aftermath of that. And I know some of you thought this was overkill. She was everywhere. But again, I really don’t think we had a choice and definitely in retrospect I think it was the only thing we could have done. And the fact that we were able even

Jeanine Pirro’s campaign team, John Gallagher and John Haggerty, describe their candidate’s strengths.

17 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL

MARK HALPERIN: Conference calls? Governor Cuomo’s biggest impact JEF POLLOCK: No, he wasn’t. Not on the strategy conference calls, the stuff that we were doing. I know on the campaign ... was this notion that he and Andrew spoke all the time. that the attorney general’s office needs MARK HALPERIN: Did Andrew invoke his name ever? And say, “My dad says do this,” or “Mario says we to think big and continue the fight of should do this?” Elliot Spitzer. JEF POLLOCK: You mean in like a strategy way?

MARK HALPERIN: Yes. —Jef Pollock

JEF POLLOCK: Not to my knowledge. Governor Cuomo’s biggest impact on the campaign, in my Governor Cuomo’s name is an incredibly valuable opinion, was that there were more people devoted to name and a great brand. policy and what the attorney general’s office could do, and working on policy ideas, than there were MAGGIE HABERMAN: Was it your sense that Governor field people on the campaign staff. And I think that Cuomo wanted to be more involved than he was? his biggest impact was this notion that the attorney general’s office needs to think big and continue the JEF POLLOCK: It was not my sense. In fact there was fight of Elliot Spitzer. a period of time for a couple of weeks when you were relatively miserable because I was the press secretary. I know Andrew and Mario talked all the time. So I can’t speak to any of those conversations. As to his MAGGIE HABERMAN: That was true. arm-twisting abilities, this is something that I’ve said. JEF POLLOCK: And thus you had to deal with me. This is something that he’s said. It’s something that And during that time period, Governor Cuomo the governor himself has said which is, if you were would receive phone calls from the press and would that good at arm-twisting, 2002 would have been a call over to the press office and say that the press is lot different. And I do think that’s true. Obviously calling me. So to my knowledge there was not the great a different race, a different environment, but I think Machiavellian push that people want to talk about people put too much emphasis on all of those things. or want to think that there was. To my knowledge it It’s a different point in time. I think obviously wasn’t there.

MARK HALPERIN: I would think that the governor couldn’t be on those strategic conference calls because he was busy calling potential supporters.

JEF POLLOCK: I hope so.

BEN SMITH: So Maggie, I just want to follow up with one thing that you may remember better than I do. It was either right after the primary or right after September 27 when Jeanine became Mrs. Pirro?

MAGGIE HABERMAN: It was after September 27.

BEN SMITH: Can you just tell me about that decision?

JEF POLLOCK: Again, honest, I don’t remember.

BEN SMITH: Was that just Andrew or was that a campaign decision?

JEF POLLOCK: There was no discussion on a conference call where we said we’re going to start calling her Mrs.

Ben Smith, from New York Daily News, asks about the management of the Cuomo campaign.

18 Pirro. To ignore the effects of page ten, which we JEF POLLOCK: He may have actually had the title. have so far ignored, is ludicrous. Her numbers were But— significantly impacted by the botched run for U.S. Senate. And these guys weren’t there, so they can’t talk WAYNE BARRETT: No. about it. JEF POLLOCK: I don’t think he did. But Joe ran the But when you look at her numbers before September day-to-day operation. Andrew was very involved in the 27, she had a favorable rating of 34 and an unfavorable campaign. Andrew is a very hands-on kind of guy, as rating of 28, an almost one-to-one favorable to many people who have worked for him at HUD and unfavorable ratio. Not good. After September 27 they at Health and other places know. And Andrew’s run flipped, with more people negative towards her than campaigns before. So this is a guy who knows his stuff. positive. But the botched Senate race started things off. Why there was no titular campaign manager, I don’t know. And in terms of the person who was seen as most likely to take on the fight of Elliot Spitzer, it was Andrew BEN SMITH: Do you think that you handled the press Cuomo. And the issue of integrity was something that right? was very important to people. JEF POLLOCK: Me? Brilliantly. BEN SMITH: So was switching to calling her Mrs. Pirro a conscious thing? BEN SMITH: Both during your stint as press secretary, and generally. I mean there was a fairly combative JEF POLLOCK: I don’t know. I don’t know. There was relationship between the campaign and the press. There never a conference call or meeting where we said we’re were a lot of questions that just never got answers. going to start calling her Mrs. Pirro—like there was to Phone calls that just never got returned. Was that the call him Andy in 2002 by certain people, for example. right way to do it?

BEN SMITH: Yeah. JEF POLLOCK: I don’t know. I think that there are always ups and downs with the press during a given JEF POLLOCK: It was a good decision for the record. campaign. On balance, I’d say that there was good and bad. I have a few complaints about it, the way that BEN SMITH: Just a couple of other little things. I was many of us who have been in this room before have looking forward to seeing more of your people today. talked about the press and the coverage of things.

JEF POLLOCK: I came. I wish I could tell you. TheNew York Post was obviously the Cuomo campaign’s best friend as it relates to the Pirro BEN SMITH: What happened? Was there a conference campaign. Although New York Magazine was pretty call about that? damaging. The story could have been a 10-day story but it became a 30-day story, or whatever it was. JEF POLLOCK: I wish I could tell you. BEN SMITH: And actually for you guys, I was curious BEN SMITH: And also, who ran the campaign? about the decision to let New York Magazine into the JEF POLLOCK: The day-to-day manager was Joe home. Was that a campaign decision or did Al just Percoco. I mean, it wasn’t his title per se, but Joe really like— ran the operation. He would have been here today but JOHN HAGGERTY: No way. Al Pirro did not clear his he’s on vacation with his family. decision to speak with New York Magazine with me. WAYNE BARRETT: Why didn’t anyone have the title MARK HALPERIN: How did you learn of his decision? campaign manager as most campaigns do? JOHN HAGGERTY: I was on a train and I got a phone call saying there’s a New York Magazine reporter in I was on a train and I got a phone call Al’s office. This was from one of Al’s partners. He had called the office, had called the headquarters’ saying there’s a New York Magazine office, just to let us know. And they should have those defibulator machines on trains. I almost had a heart reporter in Al’s office.... I almost had a attack. It was Metro North and a lot of people heard me screaming into my phone. We obviously didn’t heart attack. sanction his speaking to New York Magazine. And the only reason Jeanine down with New York Magazine —John Haggerty was because we needed to try to find out what Al said.

19 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL

JOHN HAGGERTY: And obviously Al and Jeanine also forward, what is it that the Democratic Party apparatus spoke to people like Cindy Adams going back. has figured out? Statements from the press secretary, from the chairman, how did they work to help you? MAGGIE HABERMAN: Aren’t there other ways, John, to How did you coordinate with them? And what do you find out what he said? think the chances are that this disparity will exist in future races in this state? JOHN HAGGERTY: Well, no. We did have a sense of what he said but let’s face it, Al Pirro could not be the JEF POLLOCK: I think it’s a great question, Mark. And sympathetic figure in this story. And if he’s speaking I do give the folks at Glover, Gigi, Howard and Molly, to New York Magazine, my thoughts are he’s setting great credit for working with the state party. But at himself up as a sympathetic figure. the end of the day I also give a tremendous amount of credit to Blake Zeff, who is aggressive and clever and On the day when the New York Magazine story became funny—all the things that you want in a spokesperson, front-page fodder, it was the day of the debate. And in particular for a party. And he was just getting stuff I think that should have been a good day for Jeanine out there all the time. And it wasn’t just about New relatively speaking. I think she performed well in the York City stuff, and it wasn’t just about New York debate. I think Andrew and Jeanine both did what State. He was helpful on Mike Arcuri’s race and on they needed to. She was as aggressive as she could be. ’s race. And he didn’t really lose his cool, a few chinks in the armor, but nothing major. But the New York Magazine And I think that also, there was this feeling of piece was obviously not something we wanted. And it momentum. Now it helps that you felt like the party was not something we were happy about. was going to win. The press knew that there was going to be an uptick, not necessarily a tsunami, but an BEN SMITH: One other real quick thing. There is a uptick for the Democrats. So I think that helped us. brilliant spin, which I never actually got from each of you, but just when that story broke, people were saying MARK HALPERIN: How is it coordinated though? that this was actually great for the Pirro campaign because it was going to get— JEF POLLOCK: There was certainly coordination with the state party after the primary. The state party JOHN HAGGERTY: Right. would take on things and put out some of the harsher messages. BEN SMITH: Did either of you ever believe that for a second? MARK HALPERIN: So just going forward do you think the asymmetry is going to continue? Do you think JOHN HAGGERTY: I actually thought Kieran Mahoney anything’s built that is lasting? may have planned this whole thing from the start and wasn’t even telling us. But no, I never really thought it JEF POLLOCK: I don’t know about that. I would wait was helpful. and see what Governor Spitzer wants to do with the state party. But I think he believes that it can be a real The Ascent of the New York apparatus for change and empowering Democrats State Democratic Party across the state. So I think he will put energy into it. MARK HALPERIN: Two men formerly known as the two MARK HALPERIN: Unless Fred stops me, what I’m Johns, how big was the disparity from your point of going to propose is in just a minute we’re going to go to view, just in messaging from the two state parties? the audience questions. We’ve got some excellent ones and I want to try to get to as many of them as possible. JOHN GALLAGHER: I think that the state Democratic Party, for the first time in a long time, really had I just wanted to ask one question myself and then wait their act together. I think people were willing to help for a few more audience questions and then go to those. Andrew this time a lot because there was a sense that We talked about the lack of financial resources for the Spitzer was going to win. That there was going to be state party. But it seemed to me that the Republican change in the party. That Democrats were sincere Party did not drive a message for your candidates as about unity. well as the Democrats did, which is something of a change over not so long ago. Both the Glover Park I think Republicans have kind of lost their way. There Group and the state party seemed to do a very good job was no strong leadership in the party. No one was of working to define all the Republican candidates. standing up. There was some bitterness, I think, about the Weld/Faso thing. It got complicated and got blown So I’ll just go around and maybe ask all of you to way out of proportion early on when Jeanine was asked comment, thinking not just about 2006 but going about endorsing Faso and she didn’t say anything.

20 think in this cycle the fresh, hungry people were on the I think in their hearts, their major Democratic side. miscalculation was that they thought The O’Donnell Factor they were going to be able to pull off MARK HALPERIN: Right. Okay let me go to the something from behind closed doors at audience questions. And I’ll ask you because we want to get in as many as we can to try to keep your the convention. responses as short as you can. And maybe start with Tony or Erick on this. Several people wanted to talk about Denise O’Donnell’s withdrawal from the race —Tony Suber and how that affected the dynamic of the primary. You guys want to address that?

There was no message from the Republican Party in TONY SUBER: Absolutely. Denise O’Donnell had a this state. And I think everybody as a candidate was great profile. From the West, a woman, a prosecutor. flying solo on that front. On paper she was great. Her persona matured and developed over the course of the campaign. But I think JOHN HAGGERTY: The only thing I would add from a in their hearts, their major miscalculation was that press relations perspective was that the state party was they thought they were going to be able to pull off very slow to react. If Andrew Cuomo puts a filing with something from behind closed doors at the convention. the Board of Elections, they should have been going through it and responding. We really had to point stuff The Cuomo folks were not going to leave things out and ask for a response, and sometimes that took 24 to chance. They did a very good job of locking up or 48 hours and the story was done. And we could have as much support and more than they needed. And used more help if they had some rapid response. I think that that was the O’Donnell campaign’s miscalculation. They felt they were going to go into the MARK HALPERIN: Any of you want to comment on convention, get a ride, and be present. And when they that? failed to do that, they didn’t have a contingency plan. So clearly it opened up, at least gave us a little room, MARK BENOIT: I’d like to jump in real quick. We fell, and it was very good for the Maloney campaign to have I think, in the coordination and the aggressiveness of another Irish person out of the race. the communications, the Schumer factor. You had an executive director, the communications director at the ERICK MULLEN: Our polling showed that O’Donnell party, and principal at the Glover Park Group all being was never going to be a serious factor in the race at former communications directors. So any time. Having said that, we thought that we would you had a certain style that worked and they all knew each other’s feel. So it was like a basketball team that had been playing for a while. That certainly helped with the coordination.

And it’s interesting to know because there’s a certain chromosomal thing with these guys—when you have a lot of them in the same place at the same time, I mean. I think it worked really well.

MARK HALPERIN: Any of the three reporters want to comment on the difference from past campaigns in terms of the disparity between the parties and being communications aides to the candidates?

MAGGIE HABERMAN: Typically in the state these parties are thin to the point of nonexistent. It’s a couple of people in a room. And it’s just all about how much they want to work and how hungry they are. And I just

Erick Mullen, campaign manager for Sean Maloney for Attorney General, describes how O’Donnell’s candidacy affected the Maloney campaign.

21 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL

get some of her support from the convention. In fact MAGGIE HABERMAN: Ironically, it was a good story for we had some lined up. We thought we had enough to Cuomo. get over 25 percent. And the Cuomo campaign did a magnificent job of persuading people to stay with JEF POLLOCK: He had no reason to dislike Cuomo. Cuomo so there would be a groundswell. But we were actively pursuing and actually in my tote column I MAGGIE HABERMAN: Right. And it made Andrew had several O’Donnell delegates listed for us, and that look like a victim and so I think it worked out well vanished on the day of the 30th. for Andrew. But I don’t know that Andrew would have necessarily wanted that story out there either. MARK HALPERIN: Want to say anything? And I doubt it was a good morning for him or at that campaign when it came out. So there’s no rule. I think JEF POLLOCK: We thought Denise was going to be a we were all trying to be, as weird as this will sound in potentially powerful candidate but we doubted the a campaign that was all about a sex investigation on money, actually. That was, we doubted that the money a boat and all sorts of other stuff, I think we were all was going to come, and it didn’t. And I think at the trying to be as responsible as we could. And I think end of the day she would have needed money. But she that’s why you didn’t actually see a lot of this stuff was a very good candidate on paper. And so we were come up. It was definitely floating out there in the certainly concerned about her. atmosphere.

MARK HALPERIN: All right. Linda. Where’s Linda who WAYNE BARRETT: Well the critical fact was that the submitted a question about Mario Cuomo. Why don’t Kennedy family shut down. And I certainly tried to you go ahead and ask it? penetrate that side of the story.

Press Strategy MAGGIE HABERMAN: And that is true, too. WAYNE BARRETT: And if the other side of a very FEMALE: Since I’m new to New York, I’ve been sitting difficult divorce, only one side of which was actually here and listening to the dialog about why the personal presented at the time of the divorce, if the other side problems of Cuomo didn’t come up. And it seemed like is still determined to be silent, then there is very little the press is saying to the candidates, “You didn’t bring that reporters can do. it up.” But I would like to know what are the rules with the press in terms of bringing up issues that need to be JEF POLLOCK: Which is why I asked the question back brought up? to Maggie, which is—even though Maggie is asking the question about child support, for example, the MAGGIE HABERMAN: It’s a really interesting question notion that that would have somehow been effective— that I’m probably going to have to refrain in large part from answering. There are no hard and fast rules. The MAGGIE HABERMAN: The child support thing I would papers tend to have different strategies. The tabloids disagree with you on. are very aggressive, particularly about personal issues. I think Jef touched on something when he said there JEF POLLOCK: I know you would. was a sense with a lot of issues with Cuomo, and to some extent with Mark Green, that we had been there, MAGGIE HABERMAN: No, no, no, no, no. But that’s not done that. Especially with the 2001 issues with Mark what you were going to say that I’m saying. The child Green, which were racially related and potentially very support thing I don’t think is as been there, done that, inflammatory. I didn’t pursue these, and I think others as the other elements of the Cuomo divorce. It was didn’t for the same reasons. covered in one paper.

It’s also true with the personal issues. So, I think the feeling was that if the candidates are going to make these things an issue themselves, then we will cover them. I think there was not a large push to do this ourselves. In fact, the only story that I saw related to ... there was a sense with a lot of issues the Cuomo divorce was by Kate Lucadamo, one of Ben’s colleagues who covered the campaign. And she with Cuomo, and to some extent with interviewed the other man in the Cuomo divorce who gave an endorsement to Andrew Cuomo. Mark Green, that we had been there,

BEN SMITH: That was actually a good story for Cuomo. done that.

—Maggie Haberman

22 JEF POLLOCK: I would agree with that, because those But at the end of the day, is my time state senate races were not winnable. Efforts were put into state senate races. We’re all professionals, we know better spent talking to a reporter from the races that are winnable and that some are not. And some of those state senate races that you all are talking the Brooklyn Ledger or is it better spent about were unwinnable.

talking to Wayne or Ben or Maggie, WAYNE BARRETT: Well, one of the roles of the party is to find candidates. What if some of those races were where more people will see not winnable because real Democrats who could have the message? run in them and won chose not to? JEF POLLOCK: I don’t agree with that, Wayne. We’re not here to talk about the state senate, but look at —Tony Suber Brooke Ellison on Long Island, who is a fabulous candidate for all sorts of reasons. But incumbency is still an important thing, and it’s even more important JEF POLLOCK: No, no. I understand. I’m talking about in a truly down ballot. An incumbent congressman what Wayne said, that the other side was going to come from upstate got beat this time. That doesn’t happen. out at some point—the two sides of the story. And the question is, at the end of the day would that have been a net benefit for any of the campaigns. And I have no Engaging Ethnic and idea, but I hypothesize that it actually would have been Specialty Media a loser. MARK HALPERIN: All right, just let me stop you WAYNE BARRETT: Well, not really, it depends on what because we’re going to get tied. We can’t do every the facts are. race. Nationally the issue of specialty media and ethnic media is a big issue. It’s obviously a big issue in FEMALE: It depends on the facts. the city and to some extent in the state. So let me go around and ask everybody from the campaigns to say MAGGIE HABERMAN: Yeah, exactly. And how they’re something you learned that worked or that didn’t work, presented. or that you hoped would work in terms of dealing with ethnic or specialty media in this race? WAYNE BARRETT: One thing about your question about the Democratic Party was their utter failure to ERICK MULLEN: I’m happy to start. Our placement, a do anything on the Senate side. I think this should distant third, led to difficulties getting the Irish media be computed in. Were they supportive of very strong engaged. The LGBT media, however, did engage candidates who had 20 to 50 point leads? Yeah. and I think we developed a good rapport with them. But getting the community papers and ethnic papers JEF POLLOCK: I don’t agree with that Wayne. engaged from our angle was a very difficult task and we tried, but with little success. WAYNE BARRETT: But what did they do in the critical race in which parties should be effective? TONY SUBER: It was difficult because of time and resources. You need to go with the biggest bang for JEF POLLOCK: In the state senate races? the buck. And we did engage certainly with the LGBT WAYNE BARRETT: Yeah. press, the Jewish press. But at the end of the day, is my time better spent talking to a reporter from the JOHN GALLAGHER: I think they spent more energy on Brooklyn Ledger or is it better spent talking to Wayne the congressional races, which worked less. or Ben or Maggie, where more people will see the message? So that was just it. In terms of priorities, JEF POLLOCK: The state party wasn’t effective? mainstream media had to be first.

JOHN GALLAGHER: They spent most of their energy in JOHN HAGGERTY: We probably did more to reach out the last days on the congressional races, which were to ethnic press than most Republicans usually do. really close. But again, it is a resource issue and we had 12 people working on the entire campaign. JOHN HAGGERTY: I wouldn’t even say last days, I mean through the summer.

23 ROUNDTABLE I: THE RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL

Using Gubernatorial Clout MARK HALPERIN: Did he seem really focused on making sure a lot of Republicans got elected? MARK HALPERIN: You guys talked a little bit about Governor Pataki but there’s another question here JOHN HAGGERTY: I think he was as focused as he could and I want to bring you back to it—did the candidate be. Given the circumstances, I think he understood ask him for more than he gave? I mean you said there better than anyone how bad—and in fact I think the wasn’t much he could do because he wasn’t all that governor thought it was going to be an even worse year popular, but he certainly could have spent more of his in New York. time trying to help her raise money, for instance. JEF POLLOCK: Republican denial is what you’re talking JOHN HAGGERTY: Showed up in person. about, right?

MARK HALPERIN: Yeah, could he have showed up MARK HALPERIN: Say that again? in person in places he was still popular? He could JEF POLLOCK: have gone to the national party. Did they have Republicans in Iowa and New communication or not? Hampshire, you’re talking about? JOHN HAGGERTY: We had communication and I think Pirro and the Chewing Gum we made a decision not to use the governor because, again, we were running much more of a candidate- Incident driven campaign about the individual as opposed to MARK HALPERIN: John Gallagher, here’s a good about the party. I think just about every Republican question. What was with Jeanine and the chewing put distance between themselves and the President. I gum? think the governor’s numbers weren’t necessarily going to be helpful. When we asked the governor, he always JOHN GALLAGHER: Well, on September 27 we were did what he was asked, but we didn’t ask for a whole in the car writing a statement, practicing a statement lot. and we knew there were going to be 50 reporters in the room, which there were. It was more like, “What color MARK HALPERIN: You didn’t want him to raise more suit are you wearing?” and it was not, “Give me the money for you than he did? chewing gum out of your mouth,” which, because the Daily News spent so much time on it, I probably should JOHN HAGGERTY: Well, I think for the governor it’s a have caught, but I didn’t. question of if he’s raising money for Pirro, he’s also got to raise money for Faso, and I think he did an equal And obviously Jeanine likes to chew gum. I should amount for each candidate. have caught it and I didn’t, but it was just—there was a whirlwind going on at that point. It was getting the candidate to midtown in under two hours to give a speech that was either going to keep us in the race or sink us. And the chewing gum was not really on my mind.

Green, Maloney, Pirro: The Political Future

MARK HALPERIN: All right. One last question, again, culled from the audience questions, for the five of you. What would you say, either based on discussions or on your own intuitive sense, is the political future of your losing candidates?

TONY SUBER: I think Sean has a great upside. Every person that we’ve spoken to talks about him as being the future of the Democratic Party. He’s bright. He’s articulate. He understands the issues and he has a passion to do this work. So I think the sky’s the limit as

Tony Suber, general consultant for Sean Maloney for Attorney General, discusses his candidate’s political future.

24 long as he does not get frustrated, like some other good MARK HALPERIN: John Gallagher, did you get my candidates, and leave the playing field, which I don’t “been there, done that” reference? Okay. Do you think think is going to happen. she’ll be more likely to run for a federal office or a state office if she runs again? ERICK MULLEN: I think what helped Sean the most outside of what we all like about him is that at JOHN GALLAGHER: You know I haven’t even talked convention time he did not enter into this whiner’s to her about that and I’m not going to speculate, campaign about getting waivers and getting in and obviously. Yesterday’s Times did a little speculation. getting to speak like some of the other candidates. People were talking about it. But I still think back to This sort of constant carping about how the rules September 27 and the TV appearances that followed weren’t mah-mah-mah. Sean sort of shooed that and I that. And even prior to that you never felt worried. I think that was interesting, because he’d been the anti- was never uncomfortable putting her on TV because establishment guy for a while. And so in one fell swoop even when the questions were tough, she could handle he brought in a whole bunch of these chairmen guys them. She’s really got a TV persona. who said, “You know what? That guy’s all right.” And I think that’s one of the reasons, no matter what JEF POLLOCK: That’s true. the polling situation was or the money situation was, she would always have earned media, because we would ERICK MULLEN: And I think that’s going to help him. have put her anywhere. And obviously, the Cuomo people didn’t put him anywhere. He doesn’t have the MARK HALPERIN: Mark, will perennial candidate Mark same persona on television. And I think that makes Green be a perennial candidate? Jeanine a viable candidate or a viable personality in New York State in the future, regardless. MARK BENOIT: I think that Governor Green—Mark Green … no, I think given his long history of MARK HALPERIN: Thank you, everybody—the community involvement and his involvement with panelists in particular, for being so forthcoming about consumer advocacy, he needs to stay in the game. Not their candidates. necessarily as a candidate, that’s his personal choice. But I think he brings a lot to the table. And I think people should not dismiss him. He’s got energy and commitment. If you work with him, he is a bit of a micromanager. But that’s a good thing because it shows his dedication. He strives for excellence and I think he should remain engaged.

MARK HALPERIN: Guys, has she been there done that, or will she run again?

JOHN HAGGERTY: I think the best way to put it is she can live to fight another day. I think in the end she got back to where she started. She learned a lot. I don’t think she’s ruled out or ruled in doing anything, particularly. But I think she wants to remain politically involved. Whether she’ll run again is a different story.

But I think she can live to fight another day and I think she learned a lot of lessons about real serious political campaigns from this race. The stop and start of the Senate race, how key it is to structure your campaign for the office you’re running for, with the right kind of experienced people.

I think she saw the difference when John and I came on in terms of having people who have a lot of campaign experience versus other smart people who really didn’t have a lot of campaign experience. And I think she learned a lot from it, so I think she can live to fight another day if she chooses to do so.

25 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor

FRED HOCHBERG: My name is Fred Hochberg and we’re going to continue with part two on the governor’s Who’s Who race. I want to thank you all for joining us. Thanks to those of you who were here for the first half. With that Moderator I’m going to turn this back over to Mark Halperin. Mark Halperin, ABC News

MARK HALPERIN: Campaign Representatives All right. Thank you. We’re talking about the governor’s race in New York, and the format Faso for Governor will be the same as it was this morning, largely driven Dean D’Amore, Campaign Manager by my colleagues’ questions and then some audience Susan Del Percio, Communications Director and questions. The audience is free to submit questions Campaign Spokesperson on the cards at any time. Sign your name to them and write legibly, and we’ll have time at the end for Friends of Tom Suozzi them. You’re welcome to submit them throughout this Paul Rivera, Senior Advisor and Campaign Manager session. Harry Siegel, Policy Director Spitzer-Paterson 2006  We’ll be dealing with this in three segments: the Christine Anderson, Communications Director Democratic primary, the Republican primary, which is where we’re going to start, and then the Jon Silvan, Campaign Research, Direct Mail, and general election. And I want to start by asking the Media Buying same question that we asked in the beginning of Ryan Toohey, Campaign Manager this morning’s session. And let me start with you Weld for New York two, representing the Faso campaign—could the Walter Breakell, Campaign Manager outcome of your primary have been different? Is it possible that Governor Weld could have won given the Journalists circumstances? Albany Times-Union The Republican Primary: Could Elizabeth Benjamin the Result Have Been Different? NY1 News Dominic Carter SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Actually yes, I think he could have won. It’s possible that the Weld campaign relied New York Times too much on a non-existent party operation. I think Patrick Healy it could have been different. Or it could at least have not ended at the convention but gone through a full primary.

MARK HALPERIN: Dean, do you agree with that?

DEAN D’AMORE: I agree. He could have won, and maybe he should have won, and if he did win he probably could have waged a much different kind of campaign. The party could have been more coalesced and raised more resources.

MARK HALPERIN: Walt?

WALTER BREAKELL: Yeah, we could have won. But we didn’t, obviously. I think we realized way too late that there was no more party left in New York. John, who had been through several convention fights and had gotten screwed several times, realized that it really comes down to having lunch with every delegate. So he did lunch, breakfast and dinner with every delegate at least twice throughout the state. And that was

Mark Halperin, ABC News political director, begins the second half of the day’s proceedings.

26 became very clear that there was no party operation, I think we realized way too late that Minarik didn’t really have control. There’s a lot of talk about getting rid of him and you guys had a that there was no more party left in really sterling opportunity to do it then. And there was talk about maybe Ed Cox and maybe New York. and maybe Bob Smith. Why didn’t you do it? Did you think it wouldn’t benefit you? And also why aren’t you —Walter Breakell doing it now? Because John is the guy that everybody’s looking to for leadership since he was the gubernatorial nominee. something that Bill was not set up to do. He ran as SUSAN DEL PERCIO: I’m going to answer the second an incumbent governor in many ways, which was not question first. Tomorrow they are, in fact, electing a going to get him the nomination. new state chairman. So I think that takes care of that Now if it went past the convention and to a primary question. And it looks like it will be Joe Mondello from fight, then we would have won. But we would have Nassau County. been broke and gotten beaten horribly by Spitzer. At As far as trying to remove Steve Minarik, it wasn’t the end of the day, Bill looked around and said, “Yes, something we were looking at. I mean we were really we have more money. We raised more money and we’ll just trying to hold onto our delegates. We were fighting win this primary. But I didn’t run to be the Republican for every single one we had, and at the point when we nominee for governor, I ran to be governor.” got closer it became about securing the nomination, MARK HALPERIN: I’m going to turn this over to Liz not getting the 25 percent. That dialog changed just Benjamin in just a second, but I want to remind the a tad about two weeks out. And that’s what we were campaign folks that one of the most valuable ways really focused on. We wanted to win the convention. to bring out the kind of information that people are You can’t run for governor and build a party at the looking for is to ask your colleagues in the other camps same time. So that responsibility was not something what they were thinking at a given time. Did you that we wanted to take on. consider doing X? Or, you could offer up things that ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: But did you ever really believe you were considering at a given time but did not do. that Minarik was behind you? The party apparatus And with that, Ms. Benjamin, the floor is yours. that he controlled worked for Weld, despite the fact that there was a primary going on, ostensibly if The Future of the Republican not officially. Did you believe that he was actually Party in New York State supporting you? And also, if he had not been there and someone else was there, could it have been better for ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: Are we focused on the you? Republican primary? SUSAN DEL PERCIO: I don’t think it would have MARK HALPERIN: Just the Republican primary. changed the fact after the convention. I think Walt saw it from the pre-convention point-of-view, and we saw ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: At some point, and this is for it afterwards. There wasn’t a party apparatus to be had. the Faso folks, at some point during the convention it You have to rebuild one—it can’t just be developed

Campaign Timelines: governor How the races were portrayed in the New York press

December 7, 2004 January 22, 2005 July 27, 2005 August 19, 2005 Democratic New York State Spitzer gains the endorsement Three-term Governor George Former Massachusetts Attorney General Eliot Spitzer of the . Pataki announces he will not Governor William Weld officially announces his candidacy for seek re-election. announces his candidacy for governor in an unusually early . move. It is rumored that this announcement was timed to coincide with Senator Charles Schumer’s public statement that he would not seek the nomination.

27 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor overnight. So I don’t think it was a matter of whether DOMINIC CARTER: I thought Dean—he wanted to say he was he 100 percent behind us. I think he was. He something. was behind all the statewide candidates. But what he was able to offer was very little. So as was mentioned MARK HALPERIN: Oh, I’m sorry. in the previous panel, each campaign really ran on its own. DEAN D’AMORE: I think the party has a strong future. I don’t think it was for John to do it all. He had to work ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: Just to follow up on the very hard to put a program together for a campaign Mondello thing, yes it’s true that they’re going to for governor, from the primary going forward to the be voting in Joe Mondello tomorrow, unless some general election. And it’s not that I think it was a lightning strikes. But you’ve certainly heard that there’s big mistake to sit around and think that the party a division that became very clear between Weld and apparatus is going to do something for you. Clearly, the Faso with a grassroots versus a top-down approach. So party was a product of Pataki, and it ran before because why wouldn’t John speak out about that? there was a governor and 12 years of that system. And it didn’t know how to act or get behind a new SUSAN DEL PERCIO: The division wasn’t among the candidate for governor. grassroots people. Those were delegates that we really went after one by one, like Walt said, sometimes three, So basically we weren’t going to waste a lot of time four, five times, if not more. So it really was a little bit trying to build the party because there was nothing of a referendum on Pataki. I think people were tired that we could do there. We needed to really focus on of being told what to do for 12 years and this was an getting our own act together. I think that the party has opportunity not to do what the party bosses dictated. a strong future. It’s got a reason to be and it has got a And they had their own voice and they knew John. lot of work to do. And there are a lot of problems in It wasn’t about the personalities, I believe, of either New York and there are a lot of good solutions on our candidate. It was about the fact that they didn’t want side that we need to develop and bring forth. to be told what to do again. WALTER BREAKELL: Can I just jump in for a second ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: So does the party have a future really quick on the party? I hate to be the skunk in the considering how divided it is right now? garden party but we—I think Republicans have lost the right to control their own destiny. External events SUSAN DEL PERCIO: I don’t think the party’s necessarily divided; I think the party’s just completely disorganized, which is different. If it were divided there would be a struggle for control. Right now it’s for I don’t think the party’s necessarily control of what, to be perfectly frank. divided; I think the party’s just ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: Well then, what kind of future can you have with no operation? completely disorganized, which is SUSAN DEL PERCIO: You have to build one. It’s clear, and again it doesn’t come from a division within the different. If it were divided there would party, but you have to build one. be a struggle for control. Right now it’s MARK HALPERIN: Mr. Carter? Just on the Republican primary. Pick up wherever you wish. for control of what, to be perfectly frank. —Susan Del Percio

September 30, 2005 January 24, 2006 January 30, 2006 February 14, 2006 In a Marist Poll, Eliot Spitzer Spitzer announces state Democrat withdraws Former New York State leads Republican candidate Senator of her name from the race for Assembly Member John Faso John Faso 64 percent to 20 Harlem as his choice for lieutenant governor. launches a statewide ad percent. lieutenant governor. The campaign announcing his intent move throws off a number to run for governor. of prominent Democrats, including former New York City Mayor and U.S. Representative , who had previously committed their support to candidate Leecia Eve. 28 I think Republicans have lost the right Weld’s Campaign: Running as Incumbent to control their own destiny ... we’re a MARK HALPERIN: Mr. Carter. party that represents roughly 25 percent DOMINIC CARTER: Thank you. I find it amazing, Walter, that you said Mr. Weld ran the campaign as of the voters ... until you are able to an incumbent. And that goes basically to where my question is. It seems like there was a great disconnect in communicate to a broader electorate ... it the primary between Mr. Weld and voters in the state. His personality may have worked in Massachusetts, but comes down to money. And there’s it didn’t seem to really connect here in New York. So here’s the question. Why didn’t you guys borrow a page no way to raise the money in the from, for example, Hillary Clinton and do a listening foreseeable future. tour across the state to introduce him to voters? WALTER BREAKELL: Well, because they are different —Walter Breakell races. Hillary’s race is about Hillary. So she was able to define the entire coverage. Our race was about Elliot Spitzer from way before Bill Weld decided to run. will make the party organize itself, move forward, and And so our strategy early on was a little different—it get well-funded candidates. But the only person left is Jeanine and I don’t think she can raise the money for another statewide race in the next two cycles. There’s just nothing to raise money with. And until that happens, we’re a party that represents roughly 25 percent of the voters. You can’t leverage that into anything by better organization, better grassroots, better anything. You still lose by 70/30.

And until you are able to communicate to a broader electorate, whether it’s independents or ticket-splitting voters, it comes down to money. And there’s no way to raise the money in the foreseeable future. That’s going to be the biggest problem for Republicans unless, of course, Governor-elect Spitzer completely steps on himself and gives us an opportunity to raise money and go after him. But I think focusing on the party apparatus is wrong. Focusing on individuals and personalities going forward is the right way to look at the state. That’s my ten cents.

Walter Breakell, campaign manager for Weld for Governor, talks about the future of the Republican Party in New York State.

February 25, 2006 March 5, 2006 May 17, 2006 May 22, 2006 Nassau County Executive A straw poll conducted by the In a Quinnipiac University Faso picks C. Scott Vanderhoef, announces his Democratic Rural Conference of Poll, Spitzer leads Suozzi, 73 a moderate Rockland County intent to run for the Democratic New York State shows Spitzer percent to 13 percent. executive, as his running mate. nomination. with an overwhelming lead over Suozzi among rural voters.

29 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor was to raise the money and then go tell the story. Our polling showed that if we made it a choice between an I think he really wanted to be governor, accomplished record of creating jobs, cutting taxes, all the talking points that every campaign puts out ad but I think he misread how different nauseum, there was a fighting chance. And we totally disregarded the Faso camp. New York is from almost any other state. DOMINIC CARTER: You really did? I mean you didn’t —Walter Breakell consider the fact that Faso might out-hustle you and out-work you? for granted and there was no one telling Bill Weld, WALTER BREAKELL: No. I mean, listen, John Faso, “Governor, we have to get out there.” We would with all due respect to Faso, isn’t the most respectable say, “How come we can’t get Weld on. Why is it so guy in the Republican Party. He is now, but at the time difficult?” I guess that’s why I find it amazing that you it was like, well he runs for everything. He’s always say you ran a campaign as an incumbent because that’s around. Don’t worry about it. We’ve got the state exactly what an incumbent would do. chairman, the implicit backing of the governor, that’s locked down. And by the time we realized that that WALTER BREAKELL: Right. I decided to join the meant nothing, it actually was a detriment not a help. campaign on December 18. On Saturday morning I We couldn’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again. called Bill and said, “Okay I’ll do it.” That afternoon Pat’s article on Decker College came out, which put us FEMALE: Did he want to be governor? He barely—it immediately on the defensive with the press. Normally, seemed he had no fire in the belly. Bill would go on New York 1 seven times a week if WALTER BREAKELL: I think he really wanted to be he could. But all you would ask about was Decker governor, but I think he misread how different New College. And that’s something that as a campaign we York is from almost any other state. I mean California, didn’t want to have and that really cut to Bill’s person. New York, Florida, and Texas are in a class of their He’s a very ethical, straight, upfront person, and he own in terms of how you campaign. In Massachusetts thought it was ridiculous that he had to be asked these $1,000,000 buys you 1,000 gross rating points for a questions. And it came through when you asked, I week. In New York that buys you 500 points in New mean anybody who— York City for a week. SUSAN DEL PERCIO: And we totally jumped on that. He thought, “I can just be Bill Weld, just this outsized WALTER BREAKELL: personality. I can leverage this and people will know Oh, of course. me.” At tops 18 percent of the people knew Bill Weld SUSAN DEL PERCIO: And because Weld was so quiet by the time he got out. And of those, it was split during the fall, really into February and March, we whether they liked or hated him. And that’s where put John on all the time. We had him speak directly. we were focused on raising the financial resources to We never used me as a spokesperson for the campaign. introduce him through TV to the voters, not through Reporters called John and he took the calls himself. a grassroots organization or anything like that. We had So we really tried to use that as a way of showing a stipulated that we were going to have that, and it was difference between the two candidates. John is going to our failed assumption. be one of you guys. He’s going to be one of the people DOMINIC CARTER: This is my last follow-up. So even who is going to talk directly to you and not necessarily though Mr. Faso, four years ago gave Alan Hevesi go through a spokesperson on everything. a serious run for his money, you guys took Faso

June 1, 2006 June 5, 2006 June 6, 2006 August 25, 2006 The Republican State , the chairman Weld announces his withdrawal Spitzer is endorsed by the Convention votes 61 percent of the state Republican Party from the race, and his support League of Conservation Voters. to 39 percent to endorse Faso and formerly Weld’s most of Faso. over former Massachusetts prominent backer, calls on Weld Governor William Weld. to withdraw from the race in the name of party unity.

30 Patrick Healy from the New York Times asks questions about the Weld campaign.

PATRICK HEALY: Walt, tell us what the discussions were like between you and Bill Weld and Russ [Schriefer] and Stuart Stevens and the early on about Decker. I mean there was some talk in the camp that this would probably be insurmountable, that it would just hang over him even if no actual legal action was taken against him. It would just be something that would loom and he would never be able to come out of it. Tell us what those discussions were like.

WALTER BREAKELL: I mean obviously just the storyline of Decker is horrible, shaking down poor kids, defrauding the government, and pocketing the cash.

PATRICK HEALY: And making a lot of money at it.

WALTER BREAKELL: And making a lot of money, $100,000,000 or $200,000,000. I mean, the 30- second ad writes itself. And we knew that automatically cut his potential votes by 20 percent, 25 percent. I think we mishandled that early on in that Bill was really offended. I honestly believe he didn’t know what the Woodcox brothers, who were really the driving he sort of like, “There’s nothing here, and I’m offended force when he went in and invested this, were doing to be asked”? to the full extent. They used his reputation to their advantage. He kind of sussed that out too late. And no WALTER BREAKELL: It’s the latter. one had the adult conversation with him until about February when we finally set out our own little unit PATRICK HEALY: Yeah. within the campaign. We had separate lawyers go in and do their own analysis, and we had a full grasp of WALTER BREAKELL: And this was one of the few splits the facts because Bill wouldn’t talk to anybody about within the camp. We didn’t speak with one voice in it. that myself, Stuart and Russ wanted to just go out and clearcut everything. Let’s go and take care of this. Let’s So we were basing all of our assumptions off of Bill do a full-page out of Jeanine’s book, which is stand up saying it’s going to be fine, and what we read on the there, be offended that this is even an issue and march blogs. I mean the Kentucky blogs were all over about forward. But we didn’t have the confidence that we had it, and some of those union guys came up to New York all the facts. And we thought maybe we were leading and were on Ben’s blog every day. And we really—I with our chin on that until we were able to get it out mean we fumbled that, although I don’t know if we of Bill. could ever have counteracted that. I don’t know if anybody actually remembers the op-ed PATRICK HEALY: But was Bill’s approach to take sort of that he wrote, which was like a legal brief. It took me a muscular proactive, “Let’s take care of this,” or was seven readings to actually get all the information out of

August 27, 2006 September 3, 2006 September 8, 2006 September 11, 2006 The New York Times endorses Newsday reports that Spitzer The New York Post endorses Zogby Poll: Spitzer 61 percent, Spitzer. has $12.2 million in campaign Spitzer in the Democratic Faso 26 percent. funds on hand, compared with primary. Suozzi’s remaining total of $1 million.

31 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor it. He went home, he wrote it, he wouldn’t let anybody PATRICK HEALY: Did you ever tell him, as the New edit it and he put it out there. And then, in a moment York guy, “You’ve got to be running this in a different of candor in June right after he got out, he was like, way?” “That was a really bad idea.” And we were like, “Yeah.” WALTER BREAKELL: Yeah. I mean, well, first of all, PATRICK HEALY: But if you could turn the page back I’ll admit I’m not strong in the grassroots. Everybody and start at the beginning of the campaign, knowing has their niche and I’m not a county dinner guy. But I the very bad facts as you agreed, what could you have think we’re missing a point here, which is this is really done differently? It sounds like the only thing to do about Elliot Spitzer. And that there was no penalty would have been to confront the candidate to get more for—I mean, Decker prevented us from locking it up facts and get him to go with a different strategy. early and gave Faso the ability to run free on most of the delegates. It gave everybody the reason to say, “Well WALTER BREAKELL: Right. We would have been a little he could go to jail.” And that was the biggest short- bit more—I mean I had only known Bill since October term problem of Decker. Most of the donors hadn’t so I wasn’t comfortable enough to go in and say, “Are heard of it. They didn’t really care. His Massachusetts you going to jail?” donor base was strong. They knew him. They loved him. So we could still raise the money. We could still PATRICK HEALY: But the consultants had. do that.

WALTER BREAKELL: Russ and Stuart had known him We knew there was going to be a nasty ad, but what for over a decade and a half. But they really respected happened is that Bill didn’t like going to these dinners. Bill and idolized him in a lot of ways. And no one had He was the last to get there and the first to leave. But that conversation with him. In retrospect, we would John would go there the night before, stay the entire have had that conversation. And also we would have time and then call everybody individually afterwards. just scapegoated the Woodcox brothers. We would have And that was an important factor, but it wouldn’t have blamed it all on them, cut bait, and run away and made mattered if they thought the race was winnable from them the story, not Bill. But again, it was all about the Republican side and if there was no placeholder for commanding the facts early on, and we didn’t have them to buy time to wait until the convention. enough command of the facts then. PATRICK HEALY: Just to follow up with Susan PATRICK HEALY: Just one thing related to that. I heard, and Dean, it was so interesting coming out of the and I’m sure Liz and Dominic heard as well, that a convention—Weld came out damaged but he still had growing number of county chairs and delegates were support. I’m just curious, in a contested primary after saying, “Look, we don’t know Bill Weld to begin with you’ve had a contested convention, how did it come and then we’re hearing these things out there about about in the talks between your camp and the Weld him. But we’re hearing nothing from his camp.” They camp that Bill Weld stepped aside? know you Walt, as Walt in the state, but they don’t know who he is.

And I guess it just goes again to what Liz was saying about how much he actually wanted to be governor. So Decker prevented us from locking it up many of these delegates saw him as this condescending figure who thought, “Well I’m a governor, I deserve early and gave Faso the ability to run this. And I’m not even willing to get on the phone or do the listening tour or some version of it.” free on most of the delegates. WALTER BREAKELL: Right. —Walter Breakell

September 12, 2006 September 25, 2006 September 29, 2006 October 2, 2006 Spitzer is nominated over The New York Sun endorses A New York Times/CBS News The Buffalo News reports that rival Thomas Suozzi in the Faso. poll shows that Spitzer campaign contributions for Spitzer Democratic primary with 81 leads not only in traditionally have come from 45 different percent of the vote. Democratic areas, but in states and that $24.5 million of heavily Republican suburbs his $39 million raised comes from Faso receives the Republican and upstate. It also shows the New York City metro area nomination. him leading on traditionally (including NJ and CT) alone. By Republican issues such as contrast, only improving the economy, holding gave him 18 cents of every dollar, taxes steady or lowering them, which raised questions about and on terrorism preparedness. Spitzer’s commitment to that economically challenged region. 32 And maybe, Walt, if there were no direct negotiations And the money—we had to halve our fundraising you could speak to this, too. How is it that Bill Weld, projections because there was about $2,000,000 or who thinks of himself as sort of a peer, sees the writing $2,500,000 of Republican money that would only on the wall? Do you guys have any leverage to move go to Weld and be picked up immediately after the him out of the race? convention because he had a better shot at winning than Faso. And then we would get about $10,000,000 SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Let me just go back to a point by the fall. At our primary we would raise $5,000,000 that Walt brought up because it plays into this. While total and be broke afterwards. Because of our Governor Weld was not going out there to all the ideological bent within the Republican Party in New county dinners, we were—but we also weren’t raising York we’d have to outspend John two to three to one to money. And that was a big issue for us. And Walt raises beat him. a good point. They were running against Elliot Spitzer and ignoring us and raising their money and doing Then, the Spitzer campaign is very smart and they what they had to do. We were running against Bill would have just pummeled us even before the primary Weld trying to take away those votes. and made sure that we wouldn’t get over the 30 percent kind of base point. And I think it’s also important to realize that Governor Weld and John Faso got along. They knew each other. FEMALE: Even on the conservative line. Bill helped him in his comptroller’s race so there was a healthy respect there. This was done through SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Right. intermediaries. I don’t know what happened on Weld’s side obviously, but there were really only a few PATRICK HEALY: Let me go back. You said you had a conversations before it really fell into place. Governor candidate who didn’t want to deal with the big problem Weld was so gracious and he just moved on and he in terms of Decker. It must have become clear at some went full on with support for John. So what could have point that your candidate was not making as many come off as an icky situation, for lack of a better word, phone calls and wasn’t working as hard. Did you ever was really a very simple and graceful departure for go to him and say, “We’re falling behind in contacting Weld. delegates; you’ve got to work harder.” And did he ever respond to that? PATRICK HEALY: And Walt, was there a “come to Jesus” moment for Weld? WALTER BREAKELL: Yeah. I mean, about three weeks out, everybody—you know it’s a very transparent WALTER BREAKELL: Yeah. We spent two days marketplace in terms of delegates, everybody knew discussing it. And it was ten to one, the one being Bill the counts, regardless of what we told the press. We all Weld, to get out of the race. Everybody else was like, knew exactly where every delegate was and what party you know, their adrenaline was pumping. Let’s just go chairman controlled what, and didn’t control what. wipe the floor with this guy. Finally we get to take the And we went and said, “Bill you’ve got to make these gloves off, which I prefer. Bill Weld’s much more of a 27 phone calls today.” And he’d do them. But it would gentleman than the rest of his campaign staff. be one call to Faso’s five, plus a meal. And it was too late. On the grassroots level if you’re too late it’s very But Bill, again, this goes back to the question of apparent. And everybody resents that. And we weren’t whether he ran to be the Republican nominee or to be able to— governor. And after he was beaten in the convention and there was absolutely no shot of getting the PATRICK HEALY: But even at the staff level it was only Independents’ party line, he couldn’t win. three weeks out before anybody had an inkling of that, and raised it to you or anybody else?

October 5, 2006 October 7, 2006 October 12, 2006 November 5, 2006 The New York Daily News The Buffalo News reports that Faso and Spitzer engage in their A Newsday/NY1 poll indicates reports that a whopping 73 Faso has $972,000 in his final debate. Fighting a 50-point Spitzer is poised for a percent of voters don’t know campaign account, compared deficit in the polls, Faso assails potentially historic landslide, enough about Faso to form an with $8.6 million in Spitzer’s. In Spitzer as self-aggrandizing and with a 72 percent to 22 percent opinion about him, according to all, Spitzer raised $39 million, politically timid, while Spitzer lead over Faso. a Quinnipiac University poll. compared with $3.4 million denounces Faso’s “angry, raised for Faso. extreme rhetoric.”

33 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor

WALTER BREAKELL: Yeah. I really think that about a month or three weeks out is really when—I mean you We were waiting for the day when guys probably had no inkling that you were going to lick your plate to win it, until probably the week out. Pataki was going to get involved. And

SUSAN DEL PERCIO: A little before that. But I think we we waited every week. We were like, had some numbers down firm that you guys just didn’t realize that we had. “Okay is this going to be the day?” And

WALTER BREAKELL: Right. that’s what we were really preparing for. SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Which put us around 38 at that And by the time it happened at time. the convention—well, it didn’t ever WALTER BREAKELL: Right. I think I had about two days before the convention. I think both of us had really happen. about 40 and it was going to break one way or the other. You guys were clearly on the ballot. We knew that going in. But it would have taken an act of God to —Susan Del Percio get you guys below your 25 by the time the convention rolled around. PATRICK HEALY: Because? PATRICK HEALY: Was one factor, Walt, that Bill was WALTER BREAKELL: I don’t know. told by Pataki, “Don’t worry about the convention, I’ll help you there”? SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Well, can I—Rudy typically doesn’t jump and get involved in primaries, as a general WALTER BREAKELL: I don’t know what both governors rule. You’re not going to see him, especially nowadays, said to each other about not worrying about the getting involved in a Republican primary. And we convention, but one of the assumptions was that we’d pretty much knew that he wasn’t going to come out have the Pataki muscle and the state party apparatus and wrap his arms around Bill Weld, just because he behind it, and there was no muscle and there was no doesn’t get involved in primaries. We were waiting for apparatus. the day when Pataki was going to get involved. And we waited every week. We were like, “Okay is this going to FEMALE: And Giuliani, you should talk about it. be the day?” And that’s what we were really preparing WALTER BREAKELL: Well I mean that’s— for. And by the time it happened at the convention— well, it didn’t ever really happen. PATRICK HEALY: Let it go Walt. Let it break. WATER BREAKELL: Right. It was implied that it was WALTER BREAKELL: We’re on the record, right? going to happen but it never happened. I think there’s two things. One is that the Decker story hurt the PATRICK HEALY: Yes, we are. Rudy issue too because it was the chairman of Leeds Weld’s investment fund who invested in Decker. Well, WALTER BREAKELL: Yeah. All right, between us kids. actually he didn’t invest in Decker, it was another fund, I mean Bill announced from the Giuliani Partners but it was close enough for an ad. We all know that. basically in August of ’05. Then Rudy and he didn’t talk after that. That’s pretty much the story. And then, with the governor’s actions, he should either have not got involved or gotten involved—to be half in, half out really hurt us. It became a press drag real quickly because everybody was writing, “When is it happening? It’s happening. It’s not happening. Why November 7, 2006 isn’t it happening? Why hasn’t it happened yet?” And Spitzer scores a record then the governor did a very good job of hijacking the percentage win against Faso, race a week before the convention and made it about beating him 70 percent to 29 him and the problems with Weld. Every bad thing percent. This tops the previous came out and then the Faso campaign very effectively record-holder Mario Cuomo’s mailed to everybody, or faxed it or emailed it, or put it 1986 win of 64.6 percent. under the doors. And we were just treading water and swallowing more than we were treading.

34 Dean D’Amore campaign manager for Faso for Governor, talks about rebuilding the Republican Party in New York State, while Susan Del Percio, communications director for Faso for Governor, looks on.

MARK HALPERIN: Let me just close with the two campaigns for the primary. Again, when you talk about Governor Pataki, you talk about the state party apparatus being nonexistent. What lessons would you draw from the primary about the state of the Republican Party in this state and what could be done differently in the future to make the party stronger?

DEAN D’AMORE: That basically the grassroots cares about and is looking realistically at what’s really wrong in the state and needs to be changed. They were trying to find a voice and trying to find a vehicle to express that, and they were very much going to be a part of the rebuilding of this party—and they need to be considered.

MARK HALPERIN: What are the issues that would help rebuild the party? Besides taxes.

DEAN D’AMORE: Jobs, investment, keeping our young people, improving transportation, access to capital, national money that will come in or anything like that. tourism, education, especially really leveraging our You have to write in from New York, and it’s more of great university system. Those are probably to me the a pragmatic marketplace where people are like, “Well, main issues. And reforming the health-care system, can you win? Okay, I’ll give you money. If not, yeah, Medicaid, and all that stuff. I’m a Republican but I don’t care.” MARK HALPERIN: Walt, also speak to the potential I don’t know about Bill’s electoral future. By giving electoral future for your candidate in New York or a lot of his money away to other candidates this year whatever other state he chooses to move to. I think he’s indicating that he would like to have the option. If Senator Clinton becomes President Clinton WALTER BREAKELL: Well, on the first part, about the there’d be an open Senate seat. Looking over Bill Republican Party, it has a critical decision to make. It’s Weld’s history, he’s a man who after about two years either got to go into preservation mode, i.e. preserving gets a little anxious and wants to move. He’ll probably the Senate, or into growth mode. And if you go run for something at some point. It could be mayor of into preservation mode it’s like a prevent defense in Essex, New York, or it could be U.S. Senate. football—you lose most of the games when you go to prevent defense. You have to be aggressive and grow. I can’t predict what will happen, but he’s a guy who And by doing that, you’re going to have to do that one cares deeply about public policy and also about the race at a time. game of politics. He really just loves the game of politics. And he is in a position, financially and stature- Again, I don’t think in the next two cycles we’ll have wise, to dabble and jump to the head of the line in a statewide Republican just because the resources whatever he wants to do. aren’t there. Because the Republicans in New York State aren’t ideologically conservative, you don’t have MARK HALPERIN: More likely to become senator, governor or go to jail in the Decker matter.

WALTER BREAKELL: Oh, more likely to be President I don’t think in the next two cycles we’ll than go to jail on the Decker matter. have a statewide Republican just because The Democratic Primary

the resources aren’t there. MARK HALPERIN: We’re going to move now to the Democratic primary—thought for a long time to —Susan Del Percio be more competitive than the Republican primary,

35 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor though it wasn’t in the end. And I’ll turn it back over to Liz. Elliot was out there meeting New ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: Before there was a primary, I Yorkers for ten years. I think it caught mean, before Suozzi actually got in, there was Chuck Schumer. And so this question is for Ryan and for John most people by surprise that he had because, Christine, you weren’t there at the time. What was it that you guys did to keep Chuck out of the race? Would Elliot have run had Chuck gotten into the race forged such a connection with the rank- and could Elliot have won, had Chuck run? and-file Dems out there, and with JON SILVAN: Well, first of all Elliot absolutely would have run. There was never a question about that and county committee members and folks like clearly Chuck would have created a lot of problems for Elliot. But at the end of the day Elliot prepared for that—as well as with members of the Chuck the way he prepares for everything—he takes risks. He plays very aggressively. He is absolutely a Assembly and Senate and other elected subscriber to the belief that the best defense in life is a good offense and he plays very strong. If Elliot was officials. intimidated by this, he never showed it to me. I don’t think he even showed it to Jefrey. And remember, —Ryan Toohey there was a point where we were intimidated, frankly, because we might have Chuck in a primary and Rudy ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: But were you relieved when in a general. And the world turned out a lot different. Chuck decided not to do it? ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: To what degree was there RYAN TOOHEY: Well, you look at the Silvan scenario maneuvering to try and get Chuck out, or was it just a of Chuck followed by Rudy, sure. I mean Elliot could matter of waiting for him to make a decision? I mean have faced an extremely expensive primary followed by there were a lot of people lining up very early. Elliot an extremely expensive general, and that would have announced in what, December 2005? been a burden. RYAN TOOHEY: December 2004. I think it’s similar to JON SILVAN: Chuck’s a tremendous candidate. what Walt was talking about with regard to Faso and Everyone remembers what he did in 1998. And so I having people locked down. There wasn’t maneuvering; don’t think anybody would underestimate Chuck’s there weren’t negotiations. Elliot went to the grassroots. ability to run a very strong campaign. That being said, He’d really done this from the time he lost his first I honestly don’t think any of us at the end of the day run for AG in ’94. And he’d made a connection with believed that Elliot wouldn’t win that primary. And we people all over the state. Chuck got a lot of headlines think that Elliot was absolutely in the right place at the and still does, and he’s a good senator bringing a lot right time to move up. back for the state. SUSAN DEL PERCIO: We were disappointed. But Elliot was out there meeting New Yorkers for ten years. I think it caught most people by surprise that he PAUL RIVERA: Don’t overlook the fact that it probably had forged such a connection with the rank-and-file still would have been—Suozzi would have been in that Dems out there, and with county committee members race, too. It would have been a three-way campaign. and folks like that—as well as with members of the The outcome probably would not have been any Assembly and Senate and other elected officials. different as it relates to Tom, but the race would have been covered in a very, very different way, and the way Elliot had really done a lot of legwork there. At last in which the candidates would have had to execute night’s dinner, Mark Green told me a story. When he their campaigns would have been very different. was beginning to campaign for AG, wherever he’d go and do an event he’d take an informal straw poll ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: Tom’s connected to Chuck. asking folks, if you had to vote for governor today Would he actually have run against him? would it be for Spitzer or Schumer? This is hearsay, but Mark said it was four to one for Elliot. I honestly don’t PAUL RIVERA: This is the Democratic Party, and know this because I wasn’t fully in Elliot’s world at that everyone’s connected to everyone. It’s no secret that time. But when and if Chuck went to the grassroots, he from the beginning of this race the numbers never didn’t have the support that Elliot had. really changed. Tom looked at numbers in December and January that showed him down 65 points, yet still

36 Dominic Carter from NY1 News asks questions about Tom Suozzi’s campaign.

decided to run. That wasn’t based on personal animus, it was based on a measure of both ambition and confidence. In a race with Spitzer and Schumer, Tom had taken on the machine before and beaten them. In his mind he would have done the same thing.

MARK HALPERIN: Dominic?

PAUL RIVERA: It would have been a lot of fun.

Explaining Suozzi’s Candidacy

DOMINIC CARTER: Paul, you touched on exactly my question as it relates to Mr. Suozzi. In any other year, and any other race, Suozzi would be a strong, attractive candidate. To this day I still don’t understand why in the world he would go to war with his own party and take on this train that no one could stop called Elliot Spitzer. Why? I don’t get it.

PAUL RIVERA: All right. Well, the election is over so we’re not going to re-litigate the campaign. I think it’s hard to say with a straight face that the outcome could particularly strong. And he won on the merits and have been different, given the ultimate margin and won on the basis of an argument that as mayor of Glen the fact that it’s very hard to point to a major gaffe or Cove he turned it around. He fixed it. He took over a something that was destructive as it relates to Tom’s mess that the Republicans had left and rebuilt it. Now campaign. I believe that Tom is a very unique person. he’s running as a county executive and New York, If he suffered from anything during this campaign you’ve got a mess statewide because , it was a lack of familiarity with the state, with the sorry guys, left the state a mess, so he can fix it. And media, and how it works—the city-centric aspect of he can do it because he’s done it. And running against how political decisions get made—and the power and a machine where, again, Elliot had done his work and influence that the Democratic Party in New York City done his spadework. That was the rationale that he was ultimately has over the result of a Democratic primary. trying to push.

Coming from his perspective in Nassau, he ran against You find people in your career, and you guys certainly every statewide Democrat who endorsed his opponent cover a lot of them, who always have some great idea, in 2001, with a Democratic machinery which wasn’t have some great thing. I think Tom’s a little different in the sense that he had done it before. So in his mind there was still hope. Over time that became less clear. In any other year, and any other race, DOMINIC CARTER: So you’re admitting he’s guilty of being overconfident? And I would ask him this off the Suozzi would be a strong, attractive record, when the lights went off, “Tom, what the hell are you doing?” That’s exactly what I would ask him. candidate. To this day I still don’t Bob can vouch for this. understand why in the world he would PAUL RIVERA: They know. DOMINIC CARTER: And he would laugh like that. And go to war with his own party and take so I would also say to him, “When are you getting out?” Whatever he would say publicly, I would say, on this train that no one could stop “Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. When are you getting out? You’re committing career suicide. Well, Tom, called Elliot Spitzer. when are you going to get out?” And he never did. Why? The handwriting wasn’t on the wall? I’m just —Dominic Carter curious. I’m just trying to understand.

37 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor

PAUL RIVERA: I understand that. I don’t necessarily accept the premise of the first part of your question. We take some measure of pride and a And as far as it relates to getting out, it would have been malpractice for us not to raise it with him and measure of relief in that we were able to discuss it. He rejected it pretty flatly. Not a quitter. Felt that it was important when it became apparent that make this election not be about polling there was no movement, nothing was changing. There were still some things that he felt were very important and not be about process. There was that needed to be discussed and raised. a serious amount of policy discussed in We were off the record last night, so I’m going to say this for the benefit of the record today. We take some this primary. measure of pride and a measure of relief in that we were able to make this election not be about polling and not be about process. There was a serious amount of —Paul Rivera policy discussed in this primary. The fact that we have a governor-elect who will do something about high property taxes, who will do something about funding PAUL RIVERA: That isn’t true. Don’t get me wrong. He our schools, and who will do something to fix our was upstate a lot, and I actually like the work that he economy gives me great hope. did in upstate New York. I think we did a lot more in the west. We didn’t go to Albany a lot because we were Elliot has these ideas, too. Tom tried to do his best to running against Albany. We were peeing on it a lot so keep it on that level. So getting out was not something it didn’t make much sense for us to go to a place where that’s part of his constitution. And therefore it really most of the Democrats and public employee union wasn’t in the cards. When it became apparent that it members were not going to be for us. was time—certainly not you, but certainly Patrick and Liz and many others were always asking, “When’s it If there was a theory behind this, it was that we were happening?” But there were still things that he wanted going to have to do well in where to say, so he made a point of saying them. there is just tremendous dissatisfaction with the status quo. We did not do the job of lumping Elliot in with SUSAN DEL PERCIO: He never came upstate. the status quo, and that’s okay. I mean hindsight is what it is. But we spent a lot of time in western New PAUL RIVERA: That is demonstrably not true. York.

SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Well he very rarely— And the times that we were in Albany tended to be at the conferences. Tom gives great speeches but some either weren’t recorded or were at weird times or were happening at other moments—when the budget was being settled, for example. He was doing things when it was difficult to get press to come to them. And this is not a criticism of the press, it’s a criticism of the campaign. We needed to do a better job of working to get press.

Another thing that I said last night, which I’ll say again here, was that we got far better coverage than our polling ever deserved. And a lot of that is because of the quality of the candidate and to some extent the work that we tried to do in our campaign. Some of our campaign staff did not have a great relationship with members of the press. And we’re deeply appreciative of the fact that a number of you still gave us a fair shake.

And then we also raised more money than a candidate in our position should have. So we had some resources

Paul Rivera, senior advisor and campaign manager for Friends of Tom Suozzi, discusses the relationship between the Suozzi and Spitzer campaigns.

38 and had some abilities—a lot of that is a tribute and a CHRISTINE ANDERSON: A couple of questions there. I testament to the work that Tom did. think all of us were advising Elliot on the debate prep, and I think we definitely advised a slightly different Derailing Spitzer: A Possibility? course. RYAN TOOHEY: Swing on the third pitch not the first DOMINIC CARTER: Question for the Spitzer folks. And pitch. this may sound like a weird question. I’ll just throw it out there and whoever wants to respond can. But you CHRISTINE ANDERSON: Not the first. He didn’t need had to be in a very uncomfortable position in that you to engage to the extent that he did. That said, this is start this race up with what, 46 percent? Was there one of those instances when looking back afterwards ever a point when you were afraid, or how often were you realize it’s classic Elliot. He’s not one to stand back you afraid that the dynamics of this race could change? and to let things go by. He wants to hold someone Perhaps Elliot might lose his temper. Something could accountable. He wants to make his argument, and he happen on the stump that might start a downward did. And I think it worked. I will say the story from spiral and change the dynamics of the race. How debate prep is that Elliot was like a bull behind the worried were you about that? gate. He’d not been engaging. We’d really not engaged with Tom, and that was our strategy from the start. RYAN TOOHEY: Well, not that worried. Elliot is a professional. I spent a lot of time with him in 1998 So I think when he’s back behind this gate, he is so traveling around the state, seeing him day in, day out, ready to finally be able to engage. I think our fear campaigning a little bit in the AG’s office. He has was that it would be too hot. That said, I think Tom grown as a leader, as a person, as a governor. And into was hotter than we were to some degree. I think the role that he now has as governor-elect. he launched out at the very first question. We were surprised. We thought Tom would probably take a Elliot doesn’t make a whole lot of mistakes. Jon slightly different approach. said before that Elliot is the guy who prepares for things thoroughly, diligently. Elliot’s an impressive I don’t know if you guys view it as a mistake or not, intellectual figure who’s unlikely to make a mistake. but whatever good will or whatever you gained by that Our plan during the campaign never really changed debate was lost in the press afterwards, which seemed in terms of policy, in terms of putting him out there completely wrapped in the debate book. to talk about things. Whether it was going to be Tom Suozzi or somebody else, our plan was to put him out PAUL RIVERA: And the process. there and have him talk about issues. We did that really from the first speech Elliot gave in this cycle— it was CHRISTINE ANDERSON: Yeah, that’s right. a substantive address on homeland security in October of 2005. Then he gave a reform speech, and he just kept PAUL RIVERA: And not the message. Right. It became going. And by the time Tom entered the race, Elliot pretty clear to us at one point, this is before the debate, had already laid some track out there, policy-wise, in around June, after the convention, that they’re and we never really deviated from our plan, even on ignoring us, they’re going to continue to ignore us. He property taxes. won’t agree to debates. So now let’s start the whack- a-mole moment. And it became a series of little hits, DOMINIC CARTER: My last follow-up here. What little things. And constant press releases and attacks. happened during that first debate at, I forgot where Substantively not particularly effective, the goal was that was? in a sense to try and bait them. We needed to force a mistake. And they exhibited a tremendous amount of RYAN TOOHEY: It was at Pace. discipline during that period. I could see Christine’s fingerprints on that in a way that was different from DOMINIC CARTER: Pace. What happened when—I was the earlier part of the campaign. a little surprised sitting in my chair to see Spitzer go on the attack. There was actually a Times article that Patrick wrote which was illustrative of a potential direction for RYAN TOOHEY: Right. the race that ultimately didn’t play out. He did an interview with Tom, and Tom was of course DOMINIC CARTER: It was a question. I thought that he undisciplined and said some things. And then he calls might just play it safe and deflect everything away from Elliot and gets Elliot on the phone, the candidate what Suozzi threw at him. What happened that night? talking to the New York Times, the frontrunner talking What about the incident about the notes or talking to the New York Times, where in his answer he accepts points? the premise of the question, repeats the charge and then says, “Well, it’s not a big deal, you know, in terms

39 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor

Ryan Toohey, campaign manager for Spitzer-Paterson 2006, discusses the idea of Elliot Spitzer as a fighter for New Yorkers.

about. We were up 40 points, but there were things that we considered. Most notably, the anti-business, U.S. Chamber kind of independent expenditure thing that could happen. There was obviously some thought that a Langone/Golisano/U.S. Chamber alchemy plus a very hot entrance by a guy like Tom Suozzi could lead to a more challenging race.

What we considered at first in talking with Jon and Jefrey was that maybe this idea of Elliot as a fighter for New Yorkers could be too much. That he’s too aggressive. Well, it turned out, and Elliot wouldn’t have had it any other way, that we ran a race where we stayed aggressive, just as aggressive as he had been as AG. And I think it worked for us.

We didn’t back down from this idea, and we didn’t fear the notion that, hey, maybe some people will say Elliot was bad for business or maybe Langone is going to be out there, as he was. About midway through the primary he kind of receded a little bit, but he was out of Tom’s profanity.” And I could just think to myself, front and Tom was saying, “He’s a good man,” and “Well, if he’s going to keep doing this, then he’s going Langone was saying, “I’m all for Suozzi and I’m going to be in trouble because Tom will get him.” Well, then to work as hard as I can against Elliot.” they hired Christine and that stopped. But we pursued the same course and stuck with this. So, the mistake of the rage backstage and focusing on He’s a fighter. He’s a fighter for New Yorkers through that stuff—it was big. Ultimately it would not have the whole race, I think. had any impact on the outcome. Focusing on process ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: But Patrick, actually you wrote stuff like that instead of the real different, choice this story about Jimmy Segal, the post-election story elements that we tried to push by talking about record in which Jimmy talked about your ad strategy. You did vs. reality—that was part of what we talked about talk about some seeking to soften aggression to passion, last night. We didn’t get there, and we didn’t follow anger to fighting. I mean obviously he said it, so I’m on up effectively on a strong debate performance by both the record. candidates. We felt Tom did very well there, and that’s what he needed to do in a debate like that. We needed PAUL RIVERA: It worked. about 84 of them for that to actually make a difference. But it was a missed opportunity, by far. ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: And obviously it worked. But did you—you didn’t back away, but wasn’t there some MARK HALPERIN: Pat. kind of retooling of the message to say that anger is not such a bad thing and we can make it work for you, PATRICK HEALY: For the Spitzer camp, in December New Yorkers? of ’05 you’ve got Ken Langone giving a speech saying I’m going to go after Elliot Spitzer. You’ve got John RYAN TOOHEY: Not really. I mean Elliot is, as anybody Whitehead saying Elliot Spitzer’s temper is a problem. in this room who’s spent any amount of time with the These are real issues. You’ve got Tom Suozzi looming guy, he’s not an angry man. He’s not—he’s tough. And out there. You’ve got looming, perhaps. I’m just sort of curious what you saw early on, about a year ago now, I guess, or really what Elliot saw. If there was a threat out there, what was it? What might have been the biggest threat and how did you guys talk ... he’s not an angry man. He’s not— about that? he’s tough. RYAN TOOHEY: Well, you should have come to Fred’s for dinner last night because that was what I talked —Ryan Toohey on Elliott Spitzer

40 was in Albany, too, and no one knew that. You had One of the things we knew was that all the advantages of basically being the incumbent governor—you had the money, you had the ability to after 12 years of milquetoast in Albany, work the grassroots and line it all up—with none of the downsides in the change year. You guys were the agents this state was ready for somebody who of change and the incumbent at the same time, which had some moxie. Somebody who wasn’t is a neat trick. JON SILVAN: There was no roadmap for Suozzi in this afraid to step on some toes and who was case. He couldn’t run a campaign saying, “I cleaned up Nassau.” Elliot’s too close to Shelly Silver so it going to get the job done. just wasn’t going to work. Elliot had this tremendous record of accomplishment for reforming Wall Street. —Jon Silvan And nobody was going to buy the argument that Elliot wasn’t a reformer. Nobody was going to buy the argument that Elliot was going to get co-opted by an institution in Albany. he won’t deny that. So we didn’t really back away from it. If you look at ads through the arc of the campaign, PAUL RIVERA: That’s the point of contrast that we you’ll see that throughout it, in between the Judy talked about last night. There is no contrast in saying, Collins songs and the beautiful images, were notions “Well, I’m a reformer and he’s a reformer, but we’re about being a prosecutor. different kinds of reformers.” It’s just like killing yourself as you say the thing. Elliot talked about being a DA and what he learned there. We had an ad with a bunch of newspaper The campaign’s over, and we’re talking about how headlines. Spitzer cleans up. Spitzer fights. Spitzer puts things could have been done. If you’re trying to in jail. All these tough verbs. So we didn’t really retool create a contrast between an established brand like the message. Obviously in the course of the campaign Elliot Spitzer and your own, it’s pretty difficult unless you’re going to talk about things that are unrelated to you have Golisano-type money. Or some massive fighting. You’re going to talk about broader things like independent expenditure that’s going to do a hard taxes and education and health care. And when we did negative on you. You talked about how Republican in our ads, we tended to do it in a softer way. Frankly, I money only plays when someone’s viable. If Tom had think that was a function more of the creative direction any whiff of viability, that might have materialized that Jimmy headed in, rather than any kind of message in an uncoordinated fashion, of course. And then we retooling that we did. could have had a different conversation. The space for contrast was on the left. And the space was in JON SILVAN: I think this notion of Elliot’s temper being December when Elliot said, “ is dead a liability has been overstated. We had no shortage of wrong on the war. Of course we can win that war.” advice over the years, and I can’t tell you how many And with his support of the and of the people came in and said put Elliot in a sweater, put death penalty in New York. There was space on the left him on the farm, put him on the fence. One of the for someone to attack him. things we knew was that after 12 years of milquetoast in Albany, this state was ready for somebody who had Again, given his credibility with the electorate, it some moxie. Somebody who wasn’t afraid to step on would have been a very hard sell for any candidate. some toes and who was going to get the job done. But if there was ever a path for anyone, it wasn’t going Frankly, we were never worried about our candidate to be from the Republican side, given the staleness losing control. This is a guy who is very disciplined and very prepared. And we knew that voters were going to respond to somebody who was going to go out there and fight for them. If he displayed some irritation at times, so be it. And I don’t think there was ever a question about who this candidate was going to be.

RYAN TOOHEY: If I can jump in for a second, I think you guys did really well if for the last eight years Elliot

Jon Silvan, campaign researcher for Spitzer-Paterson 2006, talks about Elliot Spitzer’s public persona, while Christine Anderson and Ryan Toohey look on.

41 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor and essentially the death of their brand. And it wasn’t generate momentum. And when that didn’t happen going to be from a suburban candidate who was pretty and when Elliot went up soon after that with— moderate, who was going to try to skin that cat. RYAN TOOHEY: He went up first. PATRICK HEALY: And that’s where I think you made a strategic error on the post-debate front. You guys HARRY SIEGEL: Yeah. No, no, he went up first in a very scored some points on Elliot’s left on the death penalty technical, “steal-the-story” sort of way. You guys know. in the debate. And the next day you did a press He did a tiny buy in New York so that the ad would go conference in Albany releasing the contents of the up first, and he was up. debate book. To me, that was crystallizing, right there. You had a chance there, closer to the end to see some RYAN TOOHEY: No that’s not true. We spent a lot of momentum and— time on that. But okay, continue.

PAUL RIVERA: But I think that your research and ours PATRICK HEALY: Who’s accountable for producing an showed the same thing. That it was not going to be a ad that you all thought was not good and spending a decisive issue. Part of it comes down to framing. We lot of money on it? Who’s accountable for that? got the great curtain-raising articles. We got the great PAUL RIVERA: That’s a good question. entry stuff. A lot of that stuff was done well. It wasn’t followed up on effectively. We haven’t talked about PATRICK HEALY: What did your forensic research show? the very bad ad, the only ad that was put up, and the massive resources that the campaign wasted in terms of PAUL RIVERA: Well, my professional experience tells treasury on that effort. me you shouldn’t speak ill of the dead. So the people who were in the campaign at that point in time made It’s like you’ve got to put something up. It’ll help raise a series of decisions and gave the candidate bad advice. more money. It’ll help move the numbers a little bit. The Let’s just leave it at that. movement itself will become the story. And you can hear it because you can see it. And losing candidates tend to PATRICK HEALY: What was that relationship like, go up early. Candidates that have $19,000,000 in the because a lot of us were dealing with it? It was Tom bank go up early and stay up all the way throughout and Suozzi, candidate, and campaign manager Kim Devlin. define the race about their brand and do very well with They were a dysfunctional married couple that had that without even talking about how— been together in politics for a long time. Was the candidate well served by the campaign manager? Was MARK HALPERIN: How extensively did you test that ad he well served by himself? He was brash. He thought and what else did you consider putting up? that he could run the table with the press corps to some extent by his own rules. PAUL RIVERA: Well, I wasn’t in the campaign at that point. But as I mentioned last night, we went What about that relationship? Was that a destructive one? forensically, and Harry of course was around in that window, so he can speak to some of it. That ad was not PAUL RIVERA: You would have to go back a couple of tested. And it was not effectively developed. I think I’ll years to raise more money, develop a better profile, just leave it at that. It was terrible. introduce yourself to press more effectively before even getting in the race. I think that there was an element to HARRY SIEGEL: Let me say something about that. just reading it, because I wasn’t in the campaign at that What we were saying before was that running in New point. Looking at some of the things that were written, York State is different. And I think Elliot Spitzer you could read between the lines that there was a lot probably found some of that out in 1994 and ran a of curiosity on the part of the press corps—who is this really solid and disciplined campaign. And Tom has guy? And wow, he’s really talented. He’s running against something of a learning curve there. And I think the ad Spitzer, and he’s down. So when you first started asking was really demonstrative of that. the question, it was more, “What are you going to do?”

This was something that was half-winged. There were And then it became, “What the hell are you doing?” a few different edits. This was the one Tom personally And I think that dwelling on the relationship, there liked best. And it was a key moment. Not only did it were dysfunctional elements in that campaign. Clearly go up very early but there wasn’t at that point a plan when you lose by 60 points there were a lot of things around it, a full sense of where the race was going. Tom that went wrong. I don’t think it was a determinative had just announced and was putting this plan together, factor as it relates to this specific campaign. and the ad went up, and it wasn’t part of any broader strategy. And a lot of money went into it. The hope In a weird way, when everyone says, “in any other was that more money would come in. And this would year,” or “this year against a different candidate,” those

42 Elizabeth Benjamin from the Albany Times-Union asks about the relationship between Suozzi and the press.

kinds of things are more a function of the way in which we run campaigns in a place like New York. If it wasn’t Elliot Spitzer and if we were running against Attorney General-elect Cuomo or any other sort of big Democratic name, Tom would have won because of the issues he ran on and his abilities and skills. So if you look at it that way and ask whether the campaign manager really makes a difference in this race, then the answer is no. The jokes are, you could have had Carville running this campaign. The race would have been good on contrast, and you would have had a lot of good stuff—but it wouldn’t have made a difference given the strength of Spitzer’s brand.

So I don’t want to get into the personalities part of this too much just because that doesn’t help anything.

ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: Do you feel like he was seduced by the press, at all? It seemed to me that before he got into the race there were all these positive stories, because certainly the press was hungering for a contest and it seemed like there wasn’t one. The Schumer thing died. Golisano not so much. We didn’t really press is. You like to create races, and you like to talk know what was going to happen. And so he had a lot about races. of puff pieces come out, and then he came in and the first thing that happened was he got the Pat Healy The belief was that if there was movement, then that treatment. would have been a process story and fueled more movement. We never primed the pump. We never PAUL RIVERA: Yeah. did the things that we needed to do effectively. Could a better ad at that point in time have moved ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: And it just seems to turn on numbers? I don’t think so. And I certainly wish I had him, and he was so not disciplined. He was surprised, the $4,000,000 toward the end of the campaign as it seemed to me, taken aback by the fact that the press opposed to at the beginning of the campaign. was maybe not as friendly to him as he thought. PATRICK HEALY: Really, really quick: The Spitzer camp, PAUL RIVERA: Welcome to the big leagues, buddy. This would you rather have run during the primary against is the business we’ve chosen. We got great treatment. Weld or Faso? Did you have a preference? And did you And this is New York. You’ve got to work it. And he do anything to try to influence the Republican primary? got the coverage early in part because that’s the way the RYAN TOOHEY: I think our calculation was that we knew Elliot was poised to win this. We didn’t particularly think that either candidate could beat him If it wasn’t Elliot Spitzer and if we were unless they really had a perfect storm. Each guy had elements that we found tainted him. As running against Attorney General- Walt pointed out, Decker would have been a TV spot if we needed it. And as Elliot pointed out in debates elect Cuomo or any other sort of big and as Christine has pointed out a number of times on the record, we felt that John Faso was just too right- Democratic name, Tom would have wing for New York. So we weren’t concerned one way won because of the issues he ran on and or the other. his abilities and skills. The General Election MARK HALPERIN: We’re going to move to the general —Paul Rivera election and then again to audience questions if you’ve

43 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor got them. But continue with what you were saying as you saw who your opponent would be. What are some John’s best day was after he won the of the things you would have done to create a bigger contrast between you and Faso? Did you produce convention. But I don’t think the ads? Did you do story boards? Did you do a lot of opposition research on him? Or did you never turn to campaign was ever really able, through any of that? no fault of the campaign but through the JON SILVAN: We never produced a negative ad against Faso. In our own minds we certainly did our research. conditions, to get out of the box. We had the luxury of time and resources to prepare. So we did our research and we knew what we could do, if —Jon Silvan necessary.

John’s best day was after he won the convention. But I unbelievably high standard for his policy proposals. In don’t think the campaign was ever really able, through retrospect, that was a really great thing because it put no fault of the campaign but through the conditions, him in a position to be prepared to govern in a way to get out of the box. that most governors, I imagine, don’t enjoy. So that’s And so I don’t think we ever saw a scenario where we were where he stands today, or did on November 8. going to have to take a shot at this guy or take this guy What was the first part of the question? down. It was really never seriously contemplated, except in circumstances where we were doing just the most MARK HALPERIN: Did anyone ever say to you, why unbelievable “what-ifs,” because, frankly, that’s our job. don’t you figure out how to help these U.S. House candidates or help Senate candidates? MARK HALPERIN: With all that lead-time did you consider helping other Democrats in a way that most JON SILVAN: Oh, we did. We worked hard to help, top-of-the-ticket candidates don’t do? Or laying most notably, state senate candidates. We feel very the groundwork in an unusual way for victory and proud of the work that Elliot did through just casual transition in the administration? What kind of conversations as well as some campaigning with decisions did that involve? Andrea Stewart-Cousins in Westchester County. That was a big win for us, taking out a very long- JON SILVAN: I’ll take the second part first. Beginning serving Republican member of the state senate. Elliot in about January of ’06, people treated Elliot as the appeared in television advertisements for at least governor-elect. Because of that he was held to an three congressional candidates. And three state senate candidates. So we lent his image and his time and our money, the campaign’s money. So there was a belief at a certain point, let’s try to take back the Senate. Let’s be helpful to congressional candidates.

PATRICK HEALY: Dean and Susan, from the convention forward, what were your two best days?

DEAN D’AMORE: Winning the boilermaker.

[LAUGHTER]

SUSAN DEL PERCIO: One of the first good days was in fact not the convention, just because of what we had done with Weld, but it was the first day that Elliot Spitzer engaged and used our name. We actually existed. We weren’t just some little-known candidate. I think that was what we were called for most of the race, until it became “the candidate who trailed by 50 points.”

Susan Del Percio, communications director for Faso for Governor and Dean D’Amore campaign manager for Faso for Governor, talk about John Faso’s commitment to issues.

44 But that was certainly a good point. The other point More Chauffeur-Gate: Faso for was at the end of the first debate, when they asked the Comptroller? question, “What do you think of Alan Hevesi?” and he said, “Stupendous, honest public servant.” That was MARK HALPERIN: Ms. Benjamin. a day we thought we could capitalize on. At the end of the day it turned out that everyone else got more ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: I think that a lot of people advantage out of it than we did. But it was probably are curious about the Hevesi issue. Was there a point another day that we thought there was something of an after that broke, given what happened in 2002 with opportunity. John, when he said to you guys, “I picked the wrong race?” Because the conventional wisdom was that he You have to wake up and fight the fight every day. But maybe could have beaten Alan Hevesi, given this whole you also need to see where you are. And they branded chauffeur-gate thing. He would have been a better themselves superbly and never took the bait. We candidate by light years than Callaghan. Did anybody watched Suozzi every day, saying, “Will they do it? Can ever talk about this? you get them? Can you get them?” Which would have helped us a bit. But you have to get up and fight every SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Not even a little. day. And you also have to realize where your strengths are and where you can play them. ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: Nothing.

PATRICK HEALY: How much focus grouping did you SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Nothing. John was committed. do to look for vulnerabilities that may not have been And you can’t look back. This happened at the end apparent? And what did you find if you did that? of September, and he was focused and determined. No one could foresee what was going to happen with DEAN D’AMORE: Well, we tried everything we could. Hevesi, so you can’t look back. We talked with a lot of businesspeople. We did a lot of research. We didn’t really have much as far as the man ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: But why did he run for has an impeccable career, private life. He’s a dedicated governor and not run for comptroller again when he family man. But there were places where we thought had come so close the first time around? You could we needed to tie him to incumbency in Albany. He’d argue that so few people—40 percent of people before been there during the state’s problems. He didn’t go chauffeur-gate—knew Alan Hevesi. Arguably it’s not after, in our view, Medicaid fraud. He didn’t go after that he didn’t do a great job or did do a great job, corrupt politicians. He went for headline-grabbing although that’s all up for grabs. The question is that cases against Wall Street. almost nobody knows the guy and he came so close the first time, so why not do it again? We tried to make that into a ruinous crusade. Something that was bad for New York, bad for SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Well, I’m not going to speak for business. And we rallied to try to get business people John on this but if you look at the way that it played to stand for what their ideals are. Saying New York out, he raised $7,000,000, a record number for that can and should be better by working together to build kind of race. And Pataki won big. And this was going better business. So we really worked hard every day to be a different type of year. It made no sense for him to try and find some leverage points. And either they to run for comptroller, because it was a guaranteed no- didn’t engage us or they co-opted us. They did their tax start and he would have lost again. Sometimes people issues. They did their security issues. They did things would say for the third time. that they were able to stake out as their ground, defend their turf, and not even give us the time of day. ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: Right.

SUSAN DEL PERCIO: And that wasn’t the race that he was looking at. He really went forward and said, “This We tried to make that into a ruinous is what I want to do.” I think if things were a little different, it could have changed the dynamic with Bill crusade. Something that was bad Weld a little bit, end of December, maybe the first two or three weeks of January. But after the fact it really for New York, bad for business ... wasn’t— And either they didn’t engage us or they PATRICK HEALY: On a personal level too, didn’t his wife, Mary Frances say to him, “If you’re going to run co-opted us. again, you’re going to run for governor. That’s what you really want, or else you’re going to make money in the private sector.” —Jon Silvan

45 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor

SUSAN DEL PERCIO: I am not even going to go into what happens between the candidate and his spouse I think he has to be extremely proud during a campaign and the conversations they may have had. The fact was that this is where he was—he of what he’s done and how he fought made that decision a long time ago. There was not a chance that he was going to think about changing. every single day when people were saying

ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: And when he says now that he there’s no hope. has no regrets about the way that it all played out, do you believe that? And also the animus, if there was any, —Dean D’Amore for the time that he stepped aside for George Pataki and then subsequently George Pataki didn’t really do all that much for him. Does he look back with a lot of Lights, Camera, Action: animus, basically? Sorry, Walt. Regrets, I guess. Does Faso Freezes he look back and say— DOMINIC CARTER: At the end of the debate up in DEAN D’AMORE: No, I don’t think so. I think that he Ithaca, Mr. Faso seemed to have Mr. Spitzer somewhat really got a chance to showcase his passion, depth, and on the defensive over the Hevesi issue, when the intellect on all these issues, and he really cares about moderator at the time asked about Hevesi, and that’s the state and its direction. And he really worked hard when all this stuff started. But my question is that in to put together programs that address every single one the first couple of minutes during that debate, Mr. Faso of those things. And I think the only way that he is seemed very nervous. He seemed like he was sweating a probably disappointed is because the party and the little bit. And he also seemed like he was about to stop resources didn’t come together. That the environment talking at one point. What happened? In mid-thought, and the climate just weren’t there. But as far as his it seemed like he was about to literally stop talking. own personal output, what he invested with his time and energy and effort, I think he has to be extremely DEAN D’AMORE: He did. proud of what he’s done and how he fought every single day when people were saying there’s no hope. But he DOMINIC CARTER: But okay, so what went through believed there was hope. And he tried and we tried your mind at that point, and what was happening? every day to find something to gain leverage with. Something to turn this. And so, looking back, there DEAN D’AMORE: Well, we asked him afterwards, just never was a question of why we’re doing this. because everyone was frozen, too, and feeling every nerve ending on their body tingle and wondering SUSAN DEL PERCIO: And just to add on to that, if you what’s going to happen here. But he said that the lights looked at all four candidates, they all, early on, said, just froze him. And that was basically about it. But we “These are my issues, and this is what I’m focused on.” did change how we went into debate prep for the next I remember sitting down with Pat in February, and time as a result of that. I said, “If we’re talking about issues, this will play to John’s strength.” And it actually played out for all four DOMINIC CARTER: So he wasn’t ready? He wasn’t ready candidates. We’re having debates about property taxes for the lighting? in March and April. I think for the press it probably put them to sleep, but the fact that issues were actually SUSAN DEL PERCIO: It was the lights right above the getting out there served every candidate in their own camera that he said it caught off. And then also, this way to show their best side. was his first debate for governor, and there was a lot of pressure. It’s not an excuse. I’m saying he was nervous. WALTER BREAKELL: I think if you look at the ’02 This happens, and I think he started to gain his rhythm election for contrast, there was not one policy or speech afterwards, but it happens. by either candidate really. Well, no one really covered you guys. DOMINIC CARTER: So, Susan, what went through your mind when he stopped talking for a second there? PATRICK HEALY: Was your candidate in the general election? I think this is the general election discussion. SUSAN DEL PERCIO: “Talk! Start!” Actually it was a really difficult time. For a good portion of that debate WALTER BREAKELL: Oh, I’m sorry. I was really hoping he would have been more engaged, and as Christine said, we certainly changed our debate MARK HALPERIN: Just happy to hear from him. prep for the second time. But it was funny because Dominic. watching it, I actually thought it was worse than how it was perceived. Because we actually did get a lot of good

46 feedback. I was terribly nervous until the very end, PATRICK HEALY: And who played Faso in your debate because in a second you saw the story change when prep? he went downstairs and it came down to Hevesi and where Elliot Spitzer stood on that. And at that time he RYAN TOOHEY: Who played Faso? Jefrey. was “honest and stupendous,” and we couldn’t hope for more than that, to be honest with you. That’s where we JON SILVAN: Jefrey and then Joe [unintelligible] at the end. were at least able to change it a little bit. PATRICK HEALY: Jefrey had a baby. On Hevesi, on DOMINIC CARTER: Did Spitzer notice that Faso had “honest, stupendous,” was it planned to use those screwed up, if you will? adjectives at that point, or how much did you guys discuss that? CHRISTINE ANDERSON: We never talked about it. I don’t think we had. I don’t think we noticed. I SUSAN DEL PERCIO: We had discussed it beforehand, mean we noticed it during the debate but it wasn’t a I think. Elliot was speaking with the information he conversation afterwards. As Susan said, Hevesi was had at the time and I think we found more information pretty much all we talked about. out in the days that followed and reacted appropriately. But of course, if I personally could have taken back DEAN D’AMORE: That was an intimidating room. those words, we would have. But I think that’s Elliot That’s why I thought it was interesting that you asked again—he will act appropriately and fiercely but wants the question, because you were there as I recall, and it to have the information first. And I think at that point was a hell of a theater, to stand on the stage, it was an he was basing his comments on a public servant who impressive place. had served for 25 years and had quite a record, and we’re still waiting for the results of an investigation. PATRICK HEALY: Were you offered walk-throughs by the sponsors to let your candidates be up there and test PATRICK HEALY: And help us get to know the governor- the lights out? elect a little better. In terms of the evolution of the loyalty issue to Hevesi, how did it evolve to where CHRISTINE ANDERSON: We were. he was ready to say, “Some would say throw him overboard; some would say just isolate him?” And how PATRICK HEALY: Did you all do that and let your did he work through that? candidates— CHRISTINE ANDERSON: It was worked through pretty SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Yeah, we did it. I don’t think they quickly. Ryan and I were in the conversations where had the camera lights on. I mean, again, it sounds so internally we discussed next steps. And it was a silly to say, “Oh it was the lights.” It was just a moment decision that was actually made fairly easily. If you’re in time. Do you wish it didn’t happen? Sure. But I Elliot Spitzer, there really isn’t another answer. don’t think it necessarily changed the way the debate went. I think he certainly caught it back right away. SUSAN DEL PERCIO: And candidly that was part of our problem. The decision—actually I shouldn’t say DEAN D’AMORE: But he is also a very slow starter. And decision—the way the media moved and it became the what we noticed working with him, is in all of our Hevesi story. We tried very hard to keep positioning debate preps he gets warmed up after the first hour. and make Elliot take a position. And I think there was actually one point where it took a little too long for the PATRICK HEALY: Who played Spitzer in your debate prep? formal response to come out as to whether or how he supports him or doesn’t support him. DEAN D’AMORE: William Weld. But the problem was that that became part of a second story. It wasn’t our story. And that actually was part of the issue, in that Elliot’s reputation and his brand—that And I think at that point he was basing was what we were fighting. And again, we weren’t able to chink that armor because no one questioned if he was his comments on a public servant who trying to do something improper in supporting Hevesi had served for 25 years and had quite even at the time. So that was the problem that we faced. MARK HALPERIN: At this forum last year, a big part a record, and we’re still waiting for the of the discussion was how do you run against an incredibly well-funded, popular candidate like Mayor results of an investigation. Bloomberg. And the Ferrer campaign had a lot of anger toward the press corps. And I’m just turning it a little —Susan Del Percio bit. Tom Suozzi was very much a bomb thrower during

47 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor a good deal of the primary. You guys chose not to be, and I know that Liz and Ben and I and others noted Maybe this is naïve or idealistic, but that John Faso wasn’t out there all the time—there were these fallow periods. Did you need a different shouldn’t it be about ideas, about what kind of personality to go up against an Elliot, to throw bombs to get attention? It didn’t work for Freddy people stand for, what they’re trying to necessarily in terms of getting press coverage, but could Faso have done something different or better? do? Does it always have to be polls

DEAN D’AMORE: I’m surprised that Susan is not and money? jumping at your throat on this one because every day we talked about our attack. And I thought that the first —Dean D’Amore part of where you’re going with this would give me a chance to say what I want to say, which is that I think it’s borderline, very hurtful, I want to use the word SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Because it’s not what John irresponsible, for the media in every single story to put thought was one of the most important issues facing Faso 50 points back with no money. New Yorkers. And at this point when you’re looking at all the polls and you’re looking at the money … John Maybe this is naïve or idealistic, but shouldn’t it had a great respect for just simply being able to have be about ideas, about what people stand for, what the opportunity to run for governor and talk about they’re trying to do? Does it always have to be polls what people really need to care about. What’s affecting and money? It just cuts things off. And it hurt us them? What he thinks the solutions are for the state. tremendously when we tried to do fundraising, and And he wouldn’t go in and bait that. It wasn’t what he when we tried to go out there and generate interest thought was a priority for the state. Could it have got in our message. But no, fighting against someone him more press? Could it become a more divisive issue? like Spitzer, John Faso had a very, very strict sense of It really could have. I think polling on both sides shows decency and morals and integrity. He wasn’t going to that was something that could have moved numbers. go on anything unless we had solid information, solid But John just wouldn’t go there. facts, a very clear and distinct message. And we sent Susan out every day. We had our 8 o’clock morning DEAN D’AMORE: Did you try to convince him to? call. It’s like, “What’s our message today? What’s our attack today?” Every single day. SUSAN DEL PERCIO: No. Working with John for such a long time, you pretty much know where he puts a line SUSAN DEL PERCIO: But to add to that, we also didn’t in the sand. You don’t try and cross that. give you what you wanted, which was that fight. Like I said, he went from being John Faso, little-known candidate, to John Faso, 50 points behind Elliot Rudy Giuliani and the Spitzer. We were actually pleased once in a while just to Nomination Fight get his name in the headline. MARK HALPERIN: We talked about Rudy Giuliani and And that’s what we faced. And this was the struggle, the nomination fight. That he stayed out. What efforts at least for me. We knew what we needed to do to did you make to get him more involved in the general get more press and to get attention, because, let’s face election? it, property taxes, Medicaid, and different levels of income tax reduction are not what gets people excited. DEAN D’AMORE: We made a lot of effort. He was We got very fair coverage in that I think that there very gracious, and he was very good to us. We wish were a lot of good stories written. But in August, I’m we could have had more of his time. And at the sorry, in October, 73 percent of people polled didn’t point when we were facing the fact that Faso was just know who John Faso was. So at that point it was hard not well known enough, even among people in his just to break through in the press. own party, it would have just been outstanding to have a Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Utica, Albany, The Same-Sex Marriage Question Poughkeepsie, New York City, Long Island total effort. But the guy’s tremendously busy, and he’s helping all MARK HALPERIN: Let me ask you about one issue in these candidates throughout the country. And then order to sprinkle in some of the audience questions. what happened to us is all these other races became Elliot Spitzer is in favor of same-sex marriage, which is super-hot national races. And that took him away. unusual among statewide elected officials. Why wasn’t PATRICK HEALY: that a bigger point of contrast for you all? So who said no to whom?

48 John had a great respect for just simply Spitzer and the Press PATRICK HEALY: Just one point on the media coverage being able to have the opportunity with the Spitzer campaign. I think it was Rich Baum who said to Ben Smith early on that in a profile of to run for governor and talk about Elliot everything is known. There are not a lot of surprises. But did you feel—because I know certainly what people really need to care about. the Republicans were poking at us—Elliot was by and large given a free pass in the media, that the media What’s affecting them? What he thinks helped coronate him early on. Looking back there were stories that were challenging and certainly others did the solutions are for the state. And he poke at this or that. But largely the press corps was wouldn’t go in and bait that. somehow with Elliot. CHRISTINE ANDERSON: I don’t know that that’s —Susan Del Percio entirely fair. I think that probably my answer would be that reporters grew bored with the race. And to some extent coverage tapered off a little bit for that reason, DEAN D’AMORE: Well, Susan used to work for him. and they looked for other things. And certainly Pirro gave us a break for a while. The AG’s race certainly had MARK HALPERIN: Did you say no to yourself? enough excitement that people could stay busy. And while I think there were tough stories and I think we SUSAN DEL PERCIO: Blame me. I had this ongoing tried to deal with each one of them as we could, there fight. No. I think it was a matter of what dates were was still some tough press. available. The first thing we asked for was a fundraiser. And then a fundraising letter. I think the letter actually But by and large, when you talk about the Times’ came first before the fundraiser. So those were provided profile, for example, I remember Rich saying, “Why and then it was, where is the time? And there really would they write a profile about Elliot? Everyone wasn’t time. We had him do phone calls for us, record a knows about him.” His personal life, his family life, his phone call. Literally, when we were talking, it was like, background is largely unknown or isn’t known. He’s “I know there are 100 calls that have to be made and likely to be the next governor and there was still a lot we were just hoping to be on top of the pile,” which we to be told about him. So I think there were still stories were, actually. So he was as supportive as he could be. that were out there that never got told. There are time constraints. There were things that we probably got lucky on and MARK HALPERIN: Pat Healy, I can’t respond to that so things that never became bigger stories, but I think all I’m turning it back to you. in all reporters got a little bit bored toward the end. PATRICK HEALY: Did you think the old stories about his father’s money and the loans were going to blow up in a way that maybe they didn’t?

CHRISTINE ANDERSON: No. I mean they came back. You never quite get away from some things. But I think ... at the point when we were facing the story had been told. They had dealt with it well back then in terms of explaining it. And they gave the the fact that Faso was just not well same answers now as they did back then. known enough, even among people in Chauffeur-Gate: The Finale

his own party, it would have just been MARK HALPERIN: I want to let Wayne Barrett drive the outstanding to have a Buffalo, Rochester, Hevesi story to the end of the campaign. WAYNE BARRETT: Well, I think the Spitzer people Syracuse, Utica, Albany, Poughkeepsie, already answered some of the questions. New York City, Long Island total effort. MARK HALPERIN: Right.

—Dean D’Amore

49 WAYNE BARRETT: But what interested me most was that in addition to dis-endorsing him, he specifically Elliot is not the type to just jump said that he had compromised his ability to hold the position. That seemed to me to be a separate out there and say something without decision from dis-endorsing, and it goes way beyond withdrawing an endorsement in a political race. thinking it through a bit. You mentioned, Christine, that you and Ryan —Christine Anderson participated in the decision about the dis-endorsement. Could you discuss the process that led to the second phase of that? Who was involved in these discussions? ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: But why not do it then? When And was this seen as a politically strategic decision as the ethics report came out and you guys went very to how you were going to position yourself? quickly after the AG moved, and Elliot was clear in CHRISTINE ANDERSON: It was a small group of saying, “I’m recusing myself even though I feel like I advisers, you all know. We’re not a very big campaign. could do a good job, blah, blah, blah and be impartial.” And the same people that made the decisions Why not then say, “I have to recuse myself from all throughout the campaign were involved in the aspects of this situation” and say something nice about discussions. We had other things going on at the time. how long you’ve known Alan and then just get out? They weren’t the only things we were working on. But Instead of leaving—because it’s true—I mean that I think we knew that we needed to act decisively and happened on a Monday, and I just remember this quickly. because he was in our office on a Wednesday. You were there. ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: Do you think you acted quickly CHRISTINE ANDERSON: enough? And the question didn’t get asked. CHRISTINE ANDERSON: I’ve thought about that a lot. I ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: think he could have maybe sped it up by a day, if you Yeah, I know. But he finally did look at the timeline from when he got the results back it later that afternoon. from the investigation after the AG’s office initiated CHRISTINE ANDERSON: No. Liz gave us the hardest their own investigation. And then Elliot recusing time I think of anyone that morning and had about 18 himself and withdrawing his endorsement, it was all questions for Elliot. within a very short timeframe. ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: I’m sorry.

CHRISTINE ANDERSON: Some of which he was prepared for and some of which he wasn’t. But Elliot is not the type to just jump out there and say something without thinking it through a bit. And I think, especially with this, where there was a relationship with Alan, I think he thought he owed it to himself, Elliot, to think it through and really make sure he had all his questions answered and information.

ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: Have they spoken since?

WAYNE BARRETT: You didn’t really answer the question about saying that he had compromised his position to hold the office. I just wanted to see if I could get you to do that. Wasn’t that a separate decision, separately analyzed, as opposed to just dis-endorsing? It goes way beyond it.

CHRISTINE ANDERSON: I view it in the context of the questions we were getting and those questions would

Christine Anderson, communications director for Spitzer-Paterson 2006, talks about Elliot Spitzer’s approach to chauffeur-gate.

50 come hand in hand. We were dealing with it as an RYAN TOOHEY: I was going to say about 13, 14. issue, one issue. MARK HALPERIN: And did you do anything unusual in MARK HALPERIN: Did Hevesi attempt to contact the terms of testing them? What was the process by which candidate directly or through intermediaries? you picked what to run, where?

CHRISTINE ANDERSON: I believe some of the staff RYAN TOOHEY: We were confident in our candidate and spoke at one point, but Elliot has not spoken to him confident in our creative and confident in our message, and I think that’s part of the recusal. and we ran with that. MARK HALPERIN: MARK HALPERIN: What were the staff’s discussions What did you learn about the best like? way to spend it? JON SILVAN: We had actually conducted early on—I CHRISTINE ANDERSON: They were brief. Honestly they think it was a couple years out—a pretty sophisticated were brief and— targeting document and an examination of it. And MARK HALPERIN: Who initiated them and what was what we learned, which surprised some of us, and which was counterintuitive to conventional wisdom, the content? was that our candidate in a general was going to win CHRISTINE ANDERSON: I don’t know who initiated. this race upstate, not in the suburbs. Conventional wisdom was you usually take downstate up, give the MARK HALPERIN: Who were the players and what was upstate to the Republicans and you fight in the ’burbs. the content? And we actually knew that our swing was upstate, CHRISTINE ANDERSON: They were at senior levels of which was good news for us because it was much cheaper to advertise up there. So we had always the campaign. I think there were maybe, I think, two planned go to up very early and heavily upstate. I calls. Very, very brief. remember going up in April, and then when your MARK HALPERIN: Were they asking for something? campaign decided and we knew because we’d also spent some time and resources putting a tracking CHRISTINE ANDERSON: No, no, no. I think they were operation together, when we knew you were going seeing where we were. And we were saying this is where up in the middle of March, we pushed things ahead we are. quickly. We got up on the air. And Elliot to his credit—and this goes back to his Advertising Strategy overall approach to life—said, whatever Suozzi is spending, we’re going to outspend him three to two. So MARK HALPERIN: I was going to ask a little bit about for every two spots that somebody sees of Tom, they’re the ad strategy. Obviously you had a lot of money to going to see three of ours. And I think that combined play with and not a close race. How many spots did with the fact that the ad wasn’t effective. The race, you run overall? certainly the primary, if it was ever in contention, was over after that ad. And we reaped tremendous benefits CHRISTINE ANDERSON: Fourteen? from going up early.

Strengthening the Democratic ... what we learned, which Party surprised some of us, and which was MARK HALPERIN: I’m going to ask you one more question about the party. The same George Pataki counterintuitive to conventional figure we’ve been discussing, once upon a time, got elected governor and built his party up with a lot of wisdom, was that our candidate in effort here. During this campaign and going forward, how much do you think Governor-elect Spitzer sees a general was going to win this race part of his responsibility as being to build a strong Democratic Party in the state?

upstate, not in the suburbs. JON SILVAN: I think he sees it as a primary function of his role. The governor is the leader of the Democratic —Christine Anderson Party in the state. In his plans, Elliot puts a priority on

51 ROUNDTABLE II: THE RACE FOR governor a strong infrastructure in the state party. During this race, we worked with the Hillary folks, the Cuomo Chuck Schumer not entering the race was people, and to some degree the Hevesi campaign to put together a field network around the state called the really a great thing for the Democratic Neighborhood Network—part of the state Democratic Party which previously didn’t exist. Party in the state. And for Elliot. And we certainly plan on keeping that in place and in —Ryan Toohey fact adding to it with people who are helpful to our campaign, so that it’s an “always on” operation rather than just an election-year thing. Elliot is committed to ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: What was the most outrageous? the growth of the party and will certainly be the leader of the state Democrats. DOMINIC CARTER: What was the most outrageous?

ELIZABETH BENJAMIN: Will you spend more time on BOB HARDT: I think we had a cocaine-use question. creating a “back bench,” if you will, and recruiting candidates? DOMINIC CARTER: Oh, yes. We did have a cocaine-use question that— JON SILVAN: I grew up in Buffalo, upstate New York. And I’ve always thought that the state Democratic MARK HALPERIN: No reason not to answer it now. Party did a good job of recruiting candidates to run in races around the city here. If you go 100 miles DOMINIC CARTER: I said, “Bob are you sure you want to in either direction from Manhattan you see good ask this one?” And he said, “I’m not sure.” And I said, candidates running. When there’s a weak Republican, “Bob, I think we should kill this one.” He said, “I agree there’s always a good Democrat in the race, or at least with you.” So that was probably the most outrageous. somebody with a fighting chance. MARK HALPERIN: Did you do a rapid round in your Elliot has spent a lot of time in the western part of debate, Fred? Jon maybe you can talk a little bit to the the state, in , and I think one thing lightning. that he has realized and that people close to him have realized is that the candidate recruitment operation JON SILVAN: To be honest with you we spent a lot of time gets exponentially worse as you move away from the doing exactly what you and Bob did—all of us sitting city. There are a lot of Republican seats that are just not around the table thinking about all the outrageous contested, and they are vulnerable incumbents. There is questions. And we asked the most outrageous questions certainly some thought being put into this, and likely that any of us had the guts to stand and— plans to develop a pipeline to generate enthusiasm among young people and also specific candidate MARK HALPERIN: Well let’s hear those then. recruitment operations. Particularly upstate. JON SILVAN: Another time. So that’s what we did. We went through it all, and I know that right afterward we Lightning Round Questions went back and checked our notes. I don’t think there was anything that came out that surprised us, with MARK HALPERIN: Dominic, anything else? All right. all due respect to your questions. We must have had 150 lighting round questions that we went through, DOMINIC CARTER: I just thought about this. I’m curious. meticulously. We wanted to make sure that he was The lightning round questions. I know it only takes consistent day after day. a couple of minutes, but Bob Hart and I and others would meet for hours, literally, to come up with these DOMINIC CARTER: Were there any questions that you questions. And the conversation would go something said you would answer under no circumstances? like, “This is a great one.” “Hell no, I’m not asking anything like this. Dominic, I don’t like this question.” JON SILVAN: I don’t think so. I don’t think so.

And then we would meet right before the debate would start for a final time and toss out some, or add some, Schumer vs. Clinton depending on what was going on in the news that day. MARK HALPERIN: I’m curious as to how a candidate, particularly the All right, lightning round for the frontrunner who has a lot to lose, prepares for something three Spitzer people. Who was more helpful for your like that, when you have no idea, and you know that I’m campaign, Schumer or the Clintons? going to be a pit bull and enforce a yes or no answer. JON SILVAN: You mean post-Chuck deciding not to run?

52 MARK HALPERIN: Sure. Yeah. Who was more helpful?

JON SILVAN: You guys answer that.

MARK HALPERIN: Karen’s in the room. Karen’s right there.

RYAN TOOHEY: I think Mark answered the question. Chuck Schumer not entering the race was really a great thing for the Democratic Party in the state. And for Elliot. So Chuck Schumer.

MARK HALPERIN: Oh, okay.

RYAN TOOHEY: Now remember Chuck didn’t have a race. Hillary was part of a ticket with us and we worked collaboratively. I spoke to Karen frequently about things we were doing. And the state party, the operation I referred to before, was a Clinton/Spitzer driven process.

MARK HALPERIN: Did you ever see them do anything in terms of a technique or an experiment that appeared to be about future campaigns?

JON SILVAN: Don’t answer that question.

RYAN TOOHEY: I’m not going to answer that question.

MARK HALPERIN: Really? That’s not really in the spirit, and we’re about to be done. You don’t have to tell us what it is, just say yes or no. Jef, step right up to the table, fill us in.

RYAN TOOHEY: I think Hillary did a great job of running for New York State Senator.

MARK HALPERIN: All right. Pat, anything else?

PATRICK HEALY: Nope.

MARK HALPERIN: Thanks, everybody, for coming. We really appreciate it.

53 Dominic Carter hosts NY1 News’ nightly political PARTICIPANT show, and has been with the channel since its 1992 launch. In 2006 he received acclaim BIOGRAPHIES for his role as moderator for a series of New York statewide debates that included the races for U.S. Christine Anderson served as communications Senate, governor, and attorney general. During the first director for Eliot Spitzer’s successful 2006 debate with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, he made gubernatorial campaign. Prior to this, she was national broadcasts, as Clinton admitted for the first associate director of corporate communications at time that she was considering a run for president. global financial institution UBS AG, where she served as spokesperson for the U.S. Wealth Management Dean D’Amore served as campaign manager for Faso Division. She was deputy press secretary on the for Governor in 2006, taking a leave of absence from 2004 Kerry-Edwards campaign and also worked in his duties as chief of staff for U.S. Representative the Clinton White House as director of press pool (R-NY), a position he has held operations. since 1995. He has worked on all of Rep. Boehlert’s re- election campaigns, and prior to his career on Capitol Wayne Barrett has been covering city and state Hill worked as a bicycle messenger in New York City. politics at the Village Voice for 29 years and is the Susan Del Percio author or co-author of four books, including Grand , a New York-based Republican Illusion: The Untold Story of Rudy Giuliani and 9/11, strategist and partner at O’Reilly Strategic published last August by HarperCollins. His focus Communications, served as communications director and campaign spokesperson for John Faso’s 2006 in the 2006 election was on the attorney general and gubernatorial campaign. She has been a media comptroller races. Barrett also teaches a course on spokesperson on many campaigns, both political and investigative reporting at the corporate, and regularly appears on television as a Graduate School of Journalism. political analyst. Del Percio also served in the Giuliani Elizabeth Benjamin is the Albany Times Union’s lead administration. political reporter and blogger. She was the driving force John Gallagher was communications director for behind the creation, in December 2005, of Capitol Jeanine Pirro’s 2006 attorney general campaign. Prior Confidential, the TU’s political blog. Benjamin joined to this, he was vice president of communications the paper in 1997 and covered suburban governments for the Lower Manhattan Development and Albany City Hall before moving to the Capitol Corporation. Previously he served as New York City Bureau in 2001. regional communications director for the New York State Senate Majority under Senator Joseph L. Bruno, Mark Benoit served as a senior staffer on Mark public affairs director for Senator Frank Padavan, Green’s 2006 campaign for attorney general. He writes, and public affairs coordinator for former Assembly directs, and produces television spots and creates direct Minority Leader John Faso. Gallagher was just named mail campaigns. Benoit began his political career first deputy press secretary for New York City Mayor in 1987 working on Rev. Jesse Jackson’s presidential . campaign, and since then has worked as campaign manager, senior staffer, or consultant on 31 campaigns, Maggie Haberman is the City Hall reporter for including those of David Dinkins, , the New York Post. She returned to the Post in 2006, Catherine Abate, Peter Vallone, Betsy Gotbaum, where she had previously worked in 2001 covering and Wesley Clark, as well as ’s 2005 Bloomberg’s first mayoral campaign. In between, she mayoral bid. spent three years at the City Hall Bureau of the New York Daily News, where she covered the 2005 mayoral Walter Breakell served as campaign manager for primary, the Bloomberg administration, and rebuilding William Weld’s 2006 run for New York governor. at the World Trade Center site. She also covered the He then ran Lynn Swann’s 2006 gubernatorial Clinton-Lazio Senate race in 2000 and the 2004 campaign in . From 2003 to 2004, presidential election. Breakell served as director of strategic initiatives for New York State Governor George Pataki and in 2002 John Haggerty was campaign manager for Jeanine was director of research for the governor’s successful Pirro for Attorney General. He was also director of re-election campaign. Previously, he was also vice regional affairs for New York State Governor George president of Mercury Public Affairs, a New York- Pataki. He is a veteran of several political campaigns, based public affairs firm, and in 1998 led the political including ’s and Mayor Bloomberg’s re- research team for U.S. Senator Alfonse D’Amato. election campaign.

54 Mark Halperin has been political director of ABC elections and the 1992, 1996, and 2000 Democratic News since 1997. He manages the editorial coverage of National Conventions. politics throughout the ABC News universe. He joined ABC News in 1988, and previously covered special Ben Smith is a political columnist and blogger for events, served as White House producer, and covered the New York Daily News. Previously, he wrote for the Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign. He is the New York Observer and started that paper’s Politicker co-author of The Way to Win: Taking the White House blog. He also writes about New York politics for the in 2008 (Random House). New Republic, and in the past has worked for the Indianapolis Star, Europe, and Patrick Healy is Metro political correspondent for the New York Sun. the New York Times, covering state, city, and regional politics. Before joining the Times in January 2005, he Harry Siegel was policy director for Tom Suozzi’s spent five years as a reporter at theBoston Globe, where 2006 gubernatorial campaign. He is currently his beats included the Kerry presidential campaign, managing editor of the Manhattan Institute website the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the aftermath citiesonahill.org, as well as founder and editor-in-chief of 9/11 in New York City. His coverage of higher of New Partisan, an online journal of politics and education for the Globe earned him a 2002 Livingston culture. Previously, Siegel was editor-in-chief of the Award and other prizes. New York Press and editor of the New York Sun’s OpEd page. He is also the second author, with Fred Siegel, Fred P. Hochberg, dean of Milano The New School of The Prince of the City: Giuliani, New York, and the for Management and Urban Policy, has more than Genius of America Life and has written for the New 25 years of experience in business, government, civil Republic, the Weekly Standard and the New York Post, rights, and philanthropy. From 1998 through 2000, among other publications. he served as deputy and then acting administrator of the Small Business Administration. From 1994 to Jon Silvan, founder and CEO of Global Strategy 1998, he worked as founder and president of Heyday Group, has consulted for Eliot Spitzer since 1994. Company, a private investment firm. Prior to that, he For Spitzer’s successful 2006 gubernatorial run, he was president and chief operating officer of the Lillian conducted all campaign research, direct mail, and Vernon Corporation. He currently sits on several media buying efforts. In addition to other public boards, including the Citizens Budget Commission officials, his clients include Silverstein Properties, and the Foundation. the YES Network, the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, General Electric, and Erick Mullen served as campaign manager and media Condé Nast. consultant for Sean Maloney’s 2006 attorney general campaign. He was deputy campaign manager for Tony Suber was a general consultant to Sean Charles Schumer’s 1998 Senate race, after which he Maloney’s 2006 campaign for attorney general. served a year as Schumer’s deputy chief of staff. Mullen In 2005, he was a senior advisor to the mayoral was senior advisor to Senator Bill Bradley’s 2000 campaign of , under whom he had presidential campaign and also served as an informal previously served as deputy borough president. senior advisor to Hillary Rodham Clinton in her first Suber has also been a senior aide to former U.S. U.S. Senate campaign. His firm, Mullen & Company, Representative Floyd H. Flake (R-NY), deputy director has represented General Wesley K. Clark and his for intergovernmental relations for New York State political action committee, WesPAC, since 2004. Comptroller H. Carl McCall, and campaign manager for U.S. Representative (D-NY). Jefrey Pollock is president of Global Strategy Group and was the pollster for Andrew Cuomo’s successful Ryan F. Toohey was the campaign manager of Eliot 2006 campaign for attorney general. His other Spitzer’s successful 2006 gubernatorial bid. He has political clients include former presidential candidate worked at various private sector firms specializing in and Senator John Edwards, West Virginia Governor governmental and regulatory affairs as well as domestic Joe Manchin, New York State Attorney General and and international politics. He began his career Governor-elect Eliot Spitzer, the Senate with Spitzer in 1998 working on his first successful Democratic Policy Committee, the Democratic campaign for attorney general, after which he worked Congressional Campaign Committee, and several in the AG’s office for one year. Toohey’s political members of Congress. clients have included the government of Colombia, the “Referendum Sí” campaign in Venezuela, Dick Paul Rivera is a New York-based political strategist Gephardt for President, and ACT (America Coming who served as senior advisor and then campaign Together). manager for Tom Suozzi’s 2006 campaign for governor. He is a veteran of the past four presidential

55 MILANO BOARD OF GOVERNORS  2006–07

Steven Bloom, Chair For more than 30 years, Milano The New School for Mary Boies Management and Urban Policy has offered sharply Tonio Burgos focused programs in management and public policy that are innovative, principled and practical—in Beth Rudin DeWoody keeping with the mission of The New School and Barbaralee Diamonstein-Spielvogel Milano’s own values and purpose. Milano trains Gail Freeman leaders for the nonprofit, public and private sectors Susan U. Halpern with a measurable difference. Our inspired faculty William H. Hayden blend theory with hands-on practice, and progressive Anne H. Hess thinking with social commitment. Milano students Leo Hindery, Jr. work on local and global issues affecting organizations Jeffrey J. Hodgman and urban communities, from New York City to Eugene J. Keilin around the world. If you want to create positive change Bevis Longstreth in your organization, community or the world, come to Dennis Mehiel Milano The New School for Management and Urban Lawrence H. Parks, Jr. Policy. Betsy Davidson Pickering Lorie A. Slutsky Milano The New School for Management and Jay T. Snyder Urban Policy James A. Torrey 72 Fifth Avenue Paul A. Travis New York, NY 10011 William Weld 212.229.5400 Maggie Williams 212.229.8935 fax Mark Willis Emily Youssouf www.milano.newschool.edu

Honorary Members For admissions information, please call or email David N. Dinkins 877-MILANO1 or 212 229 5400 x1130 Pam S. Levin [email protected]

Bob Kerrey, President Fred P. Hochberg, Dean

The Center for New York City Affairs is dedicated to advancing innovative public policies that strengthen neighborhoods, support families and reduce urban poverty. Our tools include rigorous analysis; skillful journalistic research; candid public dialogue with stakeholders, and strategic planning with government officials, nonprofit practitioners and community residents.

Andrew White, Director www.newschool.edu/milano/nycaffairs iBc The Race fo Race The R Gove R no R & & aTT o R ney Gene ney R al: al: c ampai G n Round n T able 2006 • • 2006 able

The Race foR GoveRnoR A joint program of Milano and the Center for New York City Affairs at The New School. & aTToRney GeneRal 72 FiFTh AveNue campaign Roundtable 2006 New York, NY 10011 www.MilANo.NewSChool.edu Wednesday, november 29, 2006